the experiences of children and young people with social
TRANSCRIPT
The experiences of children and young people with social emotional and behavioural difficulties in physical education Medcalf, R.S. Submitted version deposited in CURVE May 2011 Original citation: Medcalf, R.S. (2010). The experiences of children and young people with social emotional and behavioural difficulties in physical education. Unpublished PhD Thesis. Coventry: Coventry University in collaboration with the University of Worcester . Copyright © and Moral Rights are retained by the author. A copy can be downloaded for personal non-commercial research or study, without prior permission or charge. This item cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the copyright holder(s). The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.
CURVE is the Institutional Repository for Coventry University http://curve.coventry.ac.uk/open
The Experiences of Children and
Young People with Social Emotional
and Behavioural Difficulties in Physical
Education
Richard Stephen Medcalf
A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy
July 2010
Coventry University in collaboration with the University of Worcester
i
Abstract
Research has previously highlighted the physical, social, affective and cognitive
benefits of engagement in quality physical education (PE) (Bailey, 2006).
Furthermore, practical, physical and expressive creative experiences in
education have also been cited as being an important constituent when
educating children and young people with social, emotional and behavioural
difficulties (SEBD) (Cole and Visser, 1998). However, research has yet to
address the experiences of the child with SEBD, as told by themselves,
alongside the ideological benefits of their participation in physical education. As
such, this study has examined how children and young people experience the
National Curriculum of PE in England and Wales. Specifically working with
those deemed by their school to have SEBD, this study aims to give voice to
how participants create meaning of their PE experiences.
A case study methodology was adopted whereby, after a period of piloting and
familiarisation, two periods of twelve weeks were spent with six adolescent
boys, each described by their schools as having SEBD. A range of participatory
methods were used to elicit their perceptions of PE. Inductive processes of
analysis generated outcomes which showed signs of the idiosyncratic nature of
varying experiences and multiple truths.
A number of themes emerged from the analysis of each case, aside to the
contextualised responses of individuals. Participants spoke of their affinity
towards the inherent practical nature of PE, which appeared to be forgiving of
their desire for cathartic opportunities to participate physically. They regularly
discussed their perception of PE being a subject allowing for relative freedoms
not found elsewhere in their curricula. Narratives which described their
experiences were also characterised by issues which focussed upon the non-
educational aspects of the subject. The perceived pardon from the academic
demands of school life, and the subsequent opportunities for socialisation with
peers, were described as times which cemented the both positive and negative
social systems at place in their classes.
ii
The case studies have resulted in the discussion of experiences which
demonstrate the rich and highly individualised nature of children and young
peoples‟ time in PE. The nature of their difficulties appeared to exacerbate and
heighten the responses to participation which have been commonly reported in
previous studies. Participants‟ time in PE was shown to be an example of the
challenges that they face in their school lives more broadly. PE served to
magnify both the positive and negative responses to education that were
described as being experienced elsewhere in their curriculum subjects.
This research has shown that, when adopting methodologies which privilege
participatory methods, it is possible to gain greater depth of understanding as to
how children with social emotional and behavioural difficulties experience
physical education.
iii
Acknowledgements
I begin by acknowledging and thanking the schools and participants, for giving
me their time and their thoughts. Without them this study would not have
meaning.
I would like to also give thanks to the supervisors who have supported me for
the past years. To Joe Marshall, Ken Hardman, Malcolm Armstrong, John
Visser and Lynn Kidman; I thank you all with great sincerity for your time, effort,
and for the guidance which you have given me.
To all of my friends and family. To my Mum and Dad who have always
supported me in anything which I chose to do, I thank them with gratitude,
respect and admiration. My debt to them is beyond measure. To my big sister,
who, although she might not know it, has taught me that with dedication and
determination you can always achieve your goals, however daunting they may
initially appear.
And finally, I give love and thanks to my wife Helen, to my best friend. Only she
will ever know what this has taken, and what it means to me. I will be forever
grateful and obliged for her faith in me, for all that she has taught me, and for
her unwavering support. This thesis is dedicated to her. I am who I am, only
through you.
iv
Declaration
I declare that this thesis is a presentation of my original research work and all
the written work and investigations are entirely my own. Wherever contributions
of others are involved, this is clearly acknowledged and referenced.
I declare that no portion of the work referred to in this thesis has been submitted
for another degree or qualification of any comparable award at this or any other
university or other institution of learning.
Richard Medcalf
July 2010
v
Table of Contents
Abstract ........................................................................................................................ i
Acknowledgements .................................................................................................... iii
Declaration ................................................................................................................. iv
Table of Contents ........................................................................................................ v
List of Tables ............................................................................................................. viii
List of Figures ............................................................................................................. ix
Abbreviations ............................................................................................................... x
Chapter One: Introduction ........................................................................................... 1
1.1 Context .................................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Purpose and Aims ................................................................................................. 4
1.3 Structure of Thesis ................................................................................................ 6
1.4 Summary ............................................................................................................... 7
Chapter Two: Literature Review .................................................................................. 9
2.1 Ideology ................................................................................................................. 9
2.2 Voice ................................................................................................................... 13
2.3 Physical Education .............................................................................................. 16
2.3.1 Definition and Categorisation of Physical Education .................................. 16
2.3.2 Aims, Purposes and Context of Physical Education .................................. 19
2.3.3 Voice in Physical Education ....................................................................... 23
2.3.4 Special Educational Needs in Physical Education ..................................... 26
2.4 Social, Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties ..................................................... 29
2.4.1 Definition and Categorisation of SEBD ...................................................... 29
2.4.2 Epidemiology of SEBD ............................................................................... 35
2.4.3 SEBD in Context ........................................................................................ 37
2.4.4 SEBD and Pupil Voice ............................................................................... 39
2.5 Physical Activity and SEBD ................................................................................. 40
2.6 Voice, SEBD and PE ........................................................................................... 44
2.7 Summary ............................................................................................................. 46
Chapter Three: Methodology ..................................................................................... 48
3.1 Methodology ........................................................................................................ 48
3.2 The „Construction‟ of Theory ............................................................................... 51
3.2.1 Socio-Cultural Construction of Language .................................................. 55
3.2.2 Symbolic Interactionism ............................................................................. 57
vi
3.3 Through „voice‟, to interpretation ......................................................................... 59
3.3.1 Personal Meaning ...................................................................................... 61
3.4 From Methodology to Methods; Qualitative Principles ........................................ 63
Chapter Four: Methods ............................................................................................. 65
4.1 Ethics................................................................................................................... 66
4.2 Piloting through Familiarisation ........................................................................... 70
4.2.1 Familiarisation School One – Waterford High School ................................ 73
4.2.2 Familiarisation School Two – Edgewood High School ............................... 74
4.2.3 Issues faced during (and lessons learnt from) familiarisation period ......... 74
4.3 Research Design and Methods ........................................................................... 77
4.4 Sampling ............................................................................................................. 85
4.4.1School Context – Berkley High School ....................................................... 85
4.4.2 School Context – Brownhill Comprehensive .............................................. 86
4.4.3 Participants ................................................................................................ 87
4.5 Analysis ............................................................................................................... 90
Chapter Five: Case Studies....................................................................................... 96
5.1 Participant A – Tom (BCT) ................................................................................ 104
5.2 Participant B – James (BHJ) ............................................................................. 117
5.3 Participant C – Ben (BHB) ................................................................................. 129
5.4 Participant D – Jack (BCJ) ................................................................................ 139
5.5 Participant E – Daniel (BHD) ............................................................................. 147
5.6 Participant F – Paul (BCP) ................................................................................ 158
5.7 Summary of Case Studies ................................................................................. 170
Chapter Six: Discussion and Interpretation ............................................................. 174
6.1 Opportunities in Physical Education .................................................................. 175
6.2 An Affective Response ...................................................................................... 182
6.3 A Socialising Effect ............................................................................................ 188
6.4 The Physicality of Experience ........................................................................... 196
6.5 Summary of Interpretations ............................................................................... 206
Chapter Seven: Conclusions ................................................................................... 211
7.1 Reflections on Methodology and Method .......................................................... 216
7.2 Study Limitations ............................................................................................... 221
7.3 Future Research ................................................................................................ 226
References .............................................................................................................. 230
Appendices.............................................................................................................. 251
vii
Appendix A – Letters of Consent and Assent (School, Parent/Guardians, Participants) ............................................................................................................ 252
Appendix B – Sample of Research Diary ................................................................ 260
Appendix C – Indicative Participant Interaction Record ........................................... 266
Appendix D – Exemplar Interview Continuation Report ........................................... 272
Appendix E – Set of Thematic Interview Questions (Exemplar) .............................. 274
Appendix F – Letter to Schools detailing the use of Photographs ........................... 277
Appendix G – Miscellaneous School Correspondence ............................................ 280
Appendix H – Indicative Interview Transcript........................................................... 286
viii
List of Tables
Table 1 – Summary of Case Study Methods .................................................... 82 Table 2 - Codes and Definitions ....................................................................... 99 Table 3 - Participant Information .................................................................... 103
ix
List of Figures
Figure 1 - Structure and Process of Methods ................................................... 65 Figure 2 - Structure of Source Information ....................................................... 97
x
Abbreviations
ADHD – Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
BERA – British Educational Research Association
BESD – Behavioural, Emotional and Social Difficulties
BPS – British Psychological Society
CAT – Cognitive Ability Test
DfEE – Department for Education and Employment
DfES – Department for Education and Skills
DCSF – Department for Children, Schools and Families
EBD – Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties
ESRC – Economic and Social Research Council
EWO – Educational Welfare Officer
IEP – Individual Education Plan
ITE – Initial Teacher Education
KS3 – Key Stage Three
NC – National Curriculum
NCPE – National Curriculum Physical Education
NQT – Newly Qualified Teacher
Ofsted – Office for Standards in Education
PA – Physical Activity
PASS – Pupil Attitude to School and Self
PE – Physical Education
PSP – Pastoral Support Plan
SEBD – Social, Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties
SEN – Special Educational Needs
SENCO – Special Educational Needs Co-ordinator
1
Chapter One: Introduction
1.1 Context
The study of physical education (PE) has long received attention in both the
public domain, and within research relating to the education, and the health, of
the nation. The subject has, for a number of reasons throughout its
development, been a topical area of interest that has received attention and
acknowledgement from a range of sources. In offering contemporary
justifications for its inclusion as a National Curriculum (NC) subject, the physical
education profession has begun to more explicitly highlight the physical, social,
affective and cognitive benefits of participation in PE1 (Bailey, 2006). Emerging
from this recognition, there appears to be a continuing regard for the subject, in
that it is appreciated as being more than a means to a physical end.
Alongside the evolving recognition that physical education has begun to
receive, there is also a wider need and growing appreciation for the inclusion of
„student voice‟ in all aspects of research in education. Legislation is driving the
practice of incorporating the „voices‟ of children and young people for whom the
research has connotations. It was noted by Lewis (2002) that the shift towards
the inclusion of young peoples‟ views has been triggered by various legislative
guidelines that have stressed the need to establish the views of children and
young people. This is underpinned by inclusive education policy documents
such as the Convention on the Rights of a Child (United Nations, 1989) and the
Right to Inclusion (United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural
Organisation, 1994). The Revised Code of Practice for Special Educational
Needs (Department for Education and Skills, 2001b) also highlights the need to
ascertain the views of the child. Young people have a right to be consulted,
1 The term „physical education‟ is now commonly followed by the appendage „…and school
sport‟. The Department for Children Schools and Families, and the Youth Sport Trust, distinguish between the two terms in relation to whether the sporting activity is within the school day or not. It is, in part, a reflection of the nature of extended school provision of sporting activities. Without negating the impact of this extension, as this research is predominantly concerned with PE in the timetabled English National Curriculum, in this thesis the term „physical education‟ is used without such parenthesis. On occasions where participants speak of extra-curricular activities, this is made clear.
2
heard, and listened to on any matters for which their views have resonance. In
this study, their views centre upon their perceptions and experiences of National
Curriculum physical education (NCPE) in England. As such, the concentration
on „student voice‟ is the focal ideology that underpins this research.
In this study, the views and experiences that are of interest are those of the
children and young people, as they negotiate their own personal routes through
the subject of physical education. When research has, in the past,
acknowledged both Special Educational Needs (SEN), and PE, it has
commonly discussed the two fields from the perspectives of those with a
physical disability of some kind. As such it has neglected to devote a
proportionate amount of time to how pupils who have some form of Social,
Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties (SEBD) experience NCPE. The neglect
that has been paid to other subsets of SEN, namely SEBD in this instance,
results in a paucity of research that references the potential differences that
these varying subsets can evoke.
Children and young people with SEBD experience notable difficulties in learning
(Cooper, 1999d). Consequently, it could be postulated that the ways in which
they experience NCPE, and in particular the way in which such a population
„voice‟ these experiences, would differ to those of a generic cohort of students.
The traits that are inferred through this label result in a group of case study
participants who differ from any other study of PE experience. They are pupils
who, without assuming any element of homogeneity amongst them, tend to
have difficulties in maintaining the behaviours that are deemed appropriate by
their school. Further issues surrounding the characteristics of those sampled in
this study, are discussed in chapters two and four of this thesis.
The views most commonly researched, and most often spoken of in regards to
physical education, often emanate from the perceptions of more non-descript
populations of young people.
3
„Whilst the notion of collecting teachers‟ and pupils‟ views of, and attitudes towards, PE is nothing new, it is much more difficult to find research into the meanings that the subject holds for them; in other words the way PE is interpreted and the sort of constructions about PE that have evolved in the light of involvement in it.‟
(Fisher, 1996, p.50).
Through appreciating the interpretations of PE that children and young people
cite over a prolonged period of time, the meanings that they ascribe to the
significant occasions within their participation are better understood. In addition
to any interpretations that are familiar to children and young people more
generally, the potentially distinct and varied meanings that ground the
experiences of a population of young people with SEBD requires sufficient
understanding and recognition. The ways in which adolescents perceive PE to
affect them, especially within the context of boys who are deemed to have
SEBD, could have ramifications when planning for, and implementing, a
curriculum that best suits their needs and desires.
The central feature of this study is the need for an awareness of situations
experienced in PE, through the medium of participatory voice. This will help to
examine the role and purpose of the NCPE, as participants see it, in their lives.
Accordingly, this research has collated a range of perceptions, as experienced
and discussed by participants with many difficulties in their schooling.
Reference is made to the understanding that each individual has of PE, through
unique experiences that have been engendered by historically bound contexts.
The data of participants‟ experiences, and the interpretations presented as a
discussion of these experiences, are each personally and culturally bound.
Although to some extent value laden in nature, (as described further in chapter
three), this research has not attempted to idealistically prove the worth of PE, as
has been a criticism given by Green (2008) to other studies of this kind. The
inductive principles of analysis that are embedded in the design of this study
have resulted in an approach that disaggregates any subjective advocacy
towards the subject, from the objectivity of the research design and process
4
itself. The strengths of this inductive process aid in an interpretation of
experiences that acknowledges the difficulties that each participant is perceived
to face, and recognises that these difficulties will contribute to a particularised
experience of physical education for that individual.
1.2 Purpose and Aims
The purpose of this study is to give a voice to the educational experiences of a
number of case studies, and to do so in a way that is conceptually bound by the
recognition that each case is unique. Adopting methodological principles which
help to aid in this understanding, the aim of this research is to bridge the gap
between the two distinct fields of special education and physical education,
which have thus far only sparingly been considered in conjunction with each
other. Furthermore, this study aims to provide an understanding, from the
experiences of the participants concerned, about the perceptions that each
case study held, regarding the nature and purposes of PE.
The over-arching purpose of this research is to investigate, through an
appreciation of student voice, the experiences of children described by their
schools as having SEBD in PE. Further to this purpose, the objectives are to:
Assess the methodological issues that resonate with the study of children
and young people‟s experiences of physical education
Within an interpretive paradigm, collect data, from which it is possible to
interpret the perceptions towards PE of secondary school pupils described
as having SEBD.
Explore and interpret the voices of children and young people who are
deemed to have SEBD, to assist in identification of areas of similarity and
difference, among cases, in their experiences of NCPE.
This research is an interpretivist exploration that will give awareness and further
the understanding of the relative importance of the NCPE to children and young
people described as having SEBD. The emphasis is, therefore, upon providing
5
an understanding of the views and experiences that participants attach to the
complexities that are involved in their participation in PE.
Practical, physical and expressive creative experiences have in the past been
acknowledged as being an important constituent when educating children with
SEBD (Cole and Visser, 1998). This thesis sought to incorporate this notion with
the continuing attention that is being paid to the wide ranging benefits of
participation in physical education. It was not an aim of this study to critique the
ways in which PE was taught to the participants, or question the differences to
the NCPE that might occur at a localised case study level. These variants are
simply acknowledged to be a contributor to the experiences and perceptions of
participants. This study was appreciative of recognising the particularities of
(and disparities within) a number of case studies, which were each presumed
diverse in nature according to the individuality of their own circumstances. The
curricula and local variations are discussed through the experiences that each
case deems to be of significance.
These views and experiences have unique meanings to the population in
question, whereby their subjective truths are seen as an abstract account which
is the product of their own personal learned observations. The interpretivist
nature of this study also involves the reconciliation of my own positionality and
investment in the process of how such data is interpreted. These issues are
further discussed in chapter three of this thesis.
The experiences reported within the participants‟ lessons are understood in this
thesis as being socially constructed over time. They are seen as being built
through the participants‟ relationship with both their own personality constructs,
and the environments in which they are being asked to learn and interact. It is in
this regard that this thesis subscribes to the notion of an inter-actional (social)
model of disability. As Vickerman (2007a) describes, this is in recognition of the
belief that „disability, causation, and location are seen as a combination of
complex interactions between the strengths and weaknesses of the child, levels
6
of support available and the appropriateness of education being provided‟
(p.22). In isolation, neither medical, nor environmental models of disability
suffice to appreciate the many causative factors at play. The subtleties of the
social construction of meaning, and the contexts in which these meanings are
ascribed, are instrumental in the design of this thesis. Akin to the inter-actional
model of disability, the methods employed in this research have appreciated the
innumerable ecological factors, which contribute to participants‟ learning and
experience.
Previous studies of participants‟ experiences in PE have demonstrated, (as is
the case for other aspects of the curriculum), that it is a subject which has the
potential to give rise to a number of varied and contextualised reactions. As
such, it is necessary to further question the perceived character of a subject that
seemingly provides the foreground for a number of educational experiences,
which could be considered as unique in comparison with the majority of other
subjects. The specificities of PE, in regards to its place within curricula in
comparison to other subjects, are worthy of interrogation in relation to the
affects upon the children and young people. These varied effects are
considered as being dependent upon the situational characteristics of the
learner in context. Further, such research is consequently relevant to the
understanding of how those with SEBD experience the practical, physical and
expressive creative elements of physical education.
1.3 Structure of Thesis
This thesis is structured in a way that acknowledges the importance of each
individual as a case in their own right. Chapter two provides a review of the key
literature in this field, relating issues of inclusion, special education, and voice,
to the subject of physical education. Definitions of the many terms used in this
introduction are provided, where relevant, in the literature review. Chapter three
builds upon the lessons of the previous studies discussed in this review, in
outlining the fundamental methodological approach, which guides the
application of data collection principles. It discusses the epistemological
7
framework of this thesis, paying reference to the core principles of
interpretivism, the social construction of meaning, and the situated nature of
learning.
Chapter four provides details on the methods, which have been used to
facilitate the application of these principles. It addresses the ways in which
these methods have been developed and justified through periods of piloting
and familiarisation. It further provides information on the sampling, ethics, and
analysis of data. Chapter five is separated into six sections, each consecutively
addressing the experiences of one of the case studies, which form the data in
this thesis. These cases are not ordered with any chronological significance in
regards to their occurrence. These sections are there to explicitly examine each
individual case. It is through these sections that, without interpretation or
judgement, the experiences of each participant are given through reference to a
number of data sources.
Chapter six provides a discussion and interpretation of the recurring themes
evident in the stories that the preceding chapter highlights. It does so in
reference to the cited acknowledgement that, first and foremost, the
understanding of each individual case is the primary responsibility of this work.
The core themes within the experiences, which appear in the data of this
research, are discussed in relation to previous studies. Chapter seven
concludes with an overview of the outcomes of this study, and a discussion of
the implications, which this study has upon this field of research.
1.4 Summary
This thesis, and the research contained within, is broadly informed by the
principles of inclusion, the right of young people to education, the right of
learners to be heard, and a belief in the virtues and values of physical
education. Combining these elements, and contributing to the literature in such
a way, will help to bridge elements of the two very distinct research fields that
this research falls within. The gaps that currently exist, in the understanding of
8
how the nature of SEBD can relate to the rubric of PE, could subsequently be
filled through the principles of an understanding that is grounded in the
experiences of the children and young people themselves.
9
Chapter Two: Literature Review
This chapter provides an overview of the noteworthy and contextual research
that has preceded this study. It is separated into six main sections, each of
which covers a core element of this research. The themes that emerge from this
chapter subsequently run through the entirety of this work: namely the issues
surrounding children and young people deemed to have SEBD, their time in
physical education and the pertinent debates that surround the subject, and,
albeit briefly, the far reaching historical context of seminal legislation that guides
the ideology for the proliferation of voice. Each of these is later further
discussed in chapter six; then, in specific relation to the data generated in this
study.
2.1 Ideology
An important feature of this research is the value placed upon the experiences
and voice of the stakeholders for whom it has resonance. The foundations for
this research are, therefore, constructed upon the premise of a process that
recognises the inherent need for the understandings of children and young
people to be considered within matters of importance to them. In doing so, I
draw upon and develop the work of the growing number of authors who have
adopted the many policy guidelines affirming the need for the inclusion of
children and young people in research which bears their name. This ideology,
and the concept of student voice in principle, is maintained through the spine of
this literature review. Voice within PE, and the voice of those deemed to have
SEBD, are each discussed within their own right.
It is not the purpose of this study to discuss at length the policy frameworks,
which profess the entitlement that children and young people should have for
their voice to be accounted for. Nonetheless the rubric that surrounds this
agenda has developed through a number of guidelines and, consequently, there
is worth in briefly outlining the seminal documents that have led to such
development. The first of these documents has frequently been cited as the
10
Convention on the Rights of the Child (United Nations, 1989), within which,
Articles 12 and 13 pay regard for the views of the child to be heard. Article 12 of
the Convention states how children must be assured „the right to express their
views freely in all matters‟ affecting them. Article 13 goes further by asserting
that children must have „the right to freedom of expression….regardless of
frontiers‟ through any media of the child‟s choice. Much has been made of this
Convention as being a document that gave great weight to the very notion of
children participating in discussions, which lead to decisions regarding their
experiences. Noyes (2005) writes how, as a result of these Articles, there has
been increased international attention in using pupil perspectives to develop
educational processes. The Convention has provided a benchmark from which
good practice is now modelled, and from where a generation of participatory
research has developed.
Conversely, before going on to highlight subsequent frameworks by which this
research is affected, it is necessary to discuss the potential dangers of an
ideological approach such as that which has arisen through the rhetoric of this
Convention. Caution has been raised as to the dangers of a simplistic „surface
compliance‟, which has arisen from the rapid popularisation of student voice
(Rudduck and Fielding, 2006). Lundy (2007) reminds us that, in its entirety,
Article 12 is more than just a vehicle from which to pay lip service to a minimal
provision for the acceptance of pupil voice. She contends that the Convention
does much more than just this in the development of children and young
people‟s human rights, and believes that to take the Convention and apply it
only to „pupil voice‟ diminishes its true worth. There could, hence, be a danger
of the use only of vignettes, which are claimed to portray a situation or
interpretation, resulting in egalitarian responses that neglect to pay due regard
for the individuality of each child. Fielding (2007) questions the adequacy of the
term „voice‟ to portray such a desire, which is far more than a conditional and
occasional recognition.
11
It is prudent, in this instance, to take the Convention for its ideological
undertones and on its word. It is not my intention to debate here the shortfalls of
a „blinkered‟ approach to a debate on the rights of a child, underpinned by
inclusive ideologies. Simply, and like many other pieces of research, which
strive for an understanding of children‟s schooling experiences, this research
applies the Convention purely for its principles in regards to the child‟s right to
express their views. That is not to say that the broader rights of the child are not
recognised thematically, if not explicitly, throughout this research (see Davis
(1992) for a conceptual discussion on children‟s rights and schooling).
The second landmark publication upon which this research is framed is the
Salamanca Statement on inclusive education (United Nations Educational
Scientific and Cultural Organisation, 1994). This Statement is arguably the most
significant international document that has ever appeared in the field of special
education (Ainscow and Cesar, 2006). It outlines guidelines in principles, policy
and practice in special needs education, re-affirming the right and commitment
to education for all, in schools of „inclusive orientation‟. Further, this Statement
also makes reference to the importance of participant voice, when it urges
governments to facilitate the participation of those persons with „disabilities‟ in
the planning and decision-making processes.
Both of these Statements have contributed to the proliferation of participatory
voice, and the resulting increased appreciation from Governments whose
responsibility it is to administer. The National perspective of such International
agreements, in relation to England and Wales, has developed over a number of
years, with a number of Governmental publications acknowledging the need for
pupils‟ experiences to be heard. The Special Educational Needs Code of
Practice (Department for Education and Skills, 2001b) recognised that „children
and young people with special educational needs have a unique knowledge of
their own needs and circumstances and their own views about what sort of help
they would like‟ (p.27). The Children‟s Plan (Department for Children Schools
and Families, 2007) also makes reference to this agenda, when highlighting that
12
„where it works well, the SEN framework ensures early identification of
children‟s needs (through) a strong voice for the child and parents in their
education‟ (p.78). Framed by the desired outcomes of Every Child Matters
(Department for Education and Skills, 2003), the Department for Children,
Schools and Families (2008b) has also recently cemented its commitment to
this agenda through the publication of legislative guidance, which emphasises
„the importance of and significant benefits which can follow from taking account
of children‟s and young people‟s views‟ (p.5). Methods which afford this
opportunity, and the methodologies from which they are grown, are discussed in
the following two chapters of this thesis.
In relation to the particular effect of such legislation on the individuals involved
in this study, localised interpretations of ideological statements, and subsequent
national policies, are notoriously challenging to benchmark. The decentralised
nature of SEN assessment has been legislated through documents which
discuss the requirement for such a delivery of these principles to take place at a
local level (Department for Education and Employment, 1996). The SEN Green
Paper „Excellence for all Children‟ (Department for Education and Employment,
1997) spoke of the regional dimension in SEN provision, which led to variation
amongst the quality and nature of the provision being offered. It has been
shown that such disparities continue to occur in regards to prevalence and
support for SEN (Mooney, Statham, Brady, Lewis, Gill, Henshall, Willmott,
Owen and Evans, 2010). In regards to participatory „voice‟, the previously cited
Special Educational Needs Code of Practice (Department for Education and
Skills, 2001b) emphasises that Local Authorities are responsible to „encourage
children with SEN to take part in decisions about their education‟ (1:13, p.9).
Such a localised emphasis serves to perpetuate the differences between the
extents to which pupils are listened to in relation to matters of their education.
These papers are further discussed in latter sections of this chapter.
Often, irrespective of local or national contexts, the principal justification for
giving children a voice is epistemological (Innes, Moss and Smigiel, 2001).
13
When completed with the correct motives, the knowledge that can be generated
through giving children and young people opportunities to voice their
experiences, is both rich and unique. This is primarily grounded by the
acknowledgment that the meanings attached by students to experiences are
rarely the same meanings, which their teachers (or other stakeholders) would
ascribe. Analysing a child‟s experiences allows insight into ways in which
his/her knowledge of a subject is formed. The knowledge that children and
young people have of their experiences can be vocalised through the
justifications that they give within the discussion of their beliefs, perceptions,
and behaviours.
2.2 Voice
The growing culture of participatory research, which facilitates the need for an
understanding of children‟s experiences, has resulted in a critical mass of
papers that offer weight and credibility to the fundamental argument of the right
to be heard. This concept has predominantly come to the fore in research
papers and policy documents in education. The pupil voice is now making a
contribution across education and other children‟s services (Lord and Jones,
2006).
Voice research is based upon the notion that children and young people are
active agents in their own learning, and, thus, are entitled to democratic
participation in research pertaining to their interests (Ravet, 2007). Evidence
has accumulated that documents the importance of the development of such
voice, in that it facilitates the inclusion of the views, perceptions, and
experiences of young people. This importance is mediated by recognising that
the multiple realities experienced by children in educational settings cannot be
fully comprehended by either inference or assumption (Innes et al., 2001). It is
only by allowing time and opportunities for participants to make sense of their
lived experiences that it is possible to appreciate the complex precursors, which
contribute to their experiences and their behaviours.
14
The principles underpinning student voice centre upon facilitating the
empowerment of those whose voices are often lost. Fielding (2004a) recognises
that the desire to encourage young people to articulate their opinions has the
potential to offer an important contribution to the education of a civic society.
Not only is the participation and voice of the child advocated within the many
diagnostic processes in which children and young people are involved (Travell
and Visser, 2006) but it is also embedded in the ideology that it enables
participants to bring themselves, their interests, energies, hopes and
experiences (Lensmire, 1998) to their work and also to the research in question.
There are clear philosophical and theoretical justifications for the proliferation of
voice in research conducted over a sustained period of time. The strength of
adopting a narrative approach to research is that it fosters a holistically deep
understanding of the situation, wherein this includes both the relationship
between internalised thoughts and existential conditions, whilst maintaining an
appreciation for the temporal position of each individual situation (Groves and
Laws, 2000). Allowing the participants‟ time to develop their narratives, affords
opportunities for discussion and trust, which are not otherwise granted. Often,
the outcomes of a short term tokenistic process pays too little reference to the
fact that young people are already indoctrinated into (and bound by) societal
norms of what is „cool‟ or customary (Fielding, 2004b). Such difficulties
strengthen the argument for a sustained and consistent approach to methods
that facilitate voice, and which are embedded throughout a long term process of
engagement with the children and young people.
Lord and Jones (2006) indicated the growing number of research articles
concerning pupil voice. Among the themes identified by them as those most
often studied in research pertaining to student voice were relevance, enjoyment,
teaching and learning, subject and activity preferences, assessment,
achievement and ability. In recognising children‟s competencies and
encouraging the proliferation of their voice, it is timely to appreciate the potential
impact that such practices could have upon participating children. Halsey,
15
Murfield, Harland and Lord (2006) summarised the diverse effects that
engagement of the voice of young people can have on those involved. They
highlighted the many positive impacts including enhanced social, personal and
emotional competence, improved attendance, higher achievement, and
improved behaviour. They also recognised the one negative impact seen in
their review, that of potential disillusionment and conflict with other priorities in
the life of a school. To overcome such disillusionment regarding the importance
of their experiences, it must be demonstrated that the children and young
people have real choice, however limited in practice that choice might be
(Travell and Visser, 2006).
Some authors have insisted that despite its many benefits, „the egalitarian
mythology of voice as a concept (simply) provides a valuable legitimating tool
for any government keen to shift attention away from increasingly aggravated
social inequalities‟ (Arnot and Reay, 2007, p.311). The authors conclude that
there are practical difficulties when looking to elicit the „silent, suppressed, inner
and outer voices‟ of participants (p.323). They contend that pupils simply speak
a common „pedagogic voice‟, the language of learning created by school
pedagogies (Arnot and Reay, 2007). An increasingly wide range of participatory
techniques are being developed, which attempt to counter such difficulties,
particularly in the context of fostering inclusion (Lewis, 2002). The merits and
challenges of each of these potential methods are discussed further in the
methods chapter of this thesis, specifically in relation to their ability to afford the
„construction of meaning‟, which individuals cite. Nonetheless, the unifying
characteristic of each of these methods recognises that children and young
people are not simply passive objects who are reliant on adults to be heard.
They are in fact capable of diligent and insightful explanations of their
experiences, which are not necessarily guided by „pedagogic voice‟. Such
insightfulness and candour is often ever more present in the child with SEBD,
and has been seen in papers regarding SEBD and voice (see for example
Wise, 2000). These papers are more suitably discussed in section 2.4.4.
16
As with all studies of participatory voice, the importance of seeing language as
being a tool in the articulation of experiences requires recognition. The social
constructions of language that Vygotsky discussed through „mediation‟ of acts,
which are bound by social, cultural, and historical factors (Daniels and Cole,
2002), are paramount to an understanding of the contexts within which they are
spoken. These issues are further discussed in section 3.2.1 to follow.
Despite these theoretical and methodological developments, and the argument
for participatory voice detailed thus far, there remain innumerable studies which
relate to the educational and sporting experiences of children and young
people, but that still fail to account for an appreciation of the importance of
listening to the voice of the child (see for example Bertone, Meard, Flavier,
Euzet and Durand, 2002.; Eldar, 2008.; Flavier, Bertone, Hauw and Durand,
2002.; and Sandford, Duncombe and Armour, 2008). If young people‟s views
are genuinely to be taken into account, then their competence must be
recognised without the doubts such as those cast here. The voices of
participants in physical education, and those with SEBD, are discussed in their
respective sections below.
2.3 Physical Education
2.3.1 Definition and Categorisation of Physical Education
The perceived role of the NCPE has noticeably expanded in recent years and,
to an extent, there has been a re-affirmation of its purposes for which some
people have long argued. In addition to these changes in rhetoric, for example
in relation to the emergence of a wider health agenda, the National Curriculum
has in the past two years been revised to place a greater emphasis on
personalised learning that is built upon „concepts‟ and „processes‟, as opposed
to the previous content led curriculum. Although not the place of this thesis to
discuss such, the changes reflect, in part, the emergence of studies that call for
critically orientated pedagogies in PE Initial Teacher Education (ITE) (Kirk,
1986; Wright, 2004; and Capel, Hayes, Katene and Velija, 2009). Frapwell
(2009) discusses the effect that such a change in curriculum will have in
17
practice. However, irrespective of the potential impact that these changes may
have in the long term, as they have occurred during the period of this study, the
amendments made would not have been expected to have taken effect at a
local level, during the course of data collection. As a point of order, despite
appropriately including the most up to date published legislation in this review,
when the term „NCPE‟ is used in context within this thesis, it continues to refer
to the previous version as used in schools at the time (Department for
Education and Employment/Qualifications and Curriculum Authority, 1999).
Examples of research included later within this review, discussed under the
remit of PE, are actually often largely removed from what many people would
consider to be a PE context. There has been a noticeable and dominant use of
physical activity, sport, and exercise to justify claims made against a subject,
which is none of these in isolation. For the purposes of this study, the definition
provided by Bailey (2006) is to be adopted, that describes PE as „that area of
the school curriculum concerned with developing students‟ physical
competence and confidence, and their ability to use these to perform in a range
of activities‟ (p.397). The role of the physical educator as a facilitator to these
processes must, of course, not be forgotten. Central to all processes occurring
in their classrooms are the pedagogic and didactic behaviours of educators,
which would most commonly be noticeably different to those exhibited by
coaches whose remit is to concentrate on a performance agenda outside of
education.
Physical education is a subject that is often advocated as being a source of
many positive developmental characteristics through adolescence. As a
statutory „core‟ subject of the National Curriculum in England and Wales, the
subject offers a niche within curriculum time in which multiple personal, physical
and social qualities can develop if complimented by teaching, learning
environments, and lesson content, which the individual finds facilitative to his or
her long term development.
18
„PE helps pupils develop personally and socially. They work as individuals, in groups and in teams, developing concepts of fairness and of personal and social responsibility. They take on different roles and responsibilities, including leadership, coaching and officiating. Through the range of experiences that PE offers, they learn how to be effective in competitive, creative and challenging situations.‟
(Qualifications and Curriculum Authority, 2007b, p.189).
By their very nature, educational environments are multi-faceted and complex
(Suomi, Collier and Brown, 2003) and as a result the learning, behaviours,
relationships and concurrent processes that occur within PE are inherently
difficult to analyse. Notwithstanding such difficulties, Bailey (2006) has noted
that the beneficial effects of any intervention (through physical activity or
physical education) are mediated not just through pure participation but through
the inter-actions between students and their teachers.
There have indeed long been claims of the multiple discourses at play in PE
and, more specifically, the breadth of learning that it is invariably claimed that
the subject develops, or is concerned to develop, in pupils (Penney, 2000).
Physical education lends itself to the development of physical skills, team
building, character development, responsibility, creativity and imagination. As
such, rather than an emphasis on the benefits resulting from participation in PE,
the subject is seen by many as having value in its own right (Whitehead, 2000).
Kay (1998) argues that PE is an end in itself and not solely a means towards
other ends.
Physical education is an indispensable source; it can be both a justifiable and
worthwhile subject in its own right, and can contribute more fully to the
educational process as a whole. No other subject can offer such a claim.
Caution must remain not to dilute such outcomes, with Penney and Chandler
(2000) citing their concern that it is not possible to legitimately continue to make
varied claims, and pursue multiple agendas, against the name of PE, without
damaging its core integrity. It has been positioned that this aim should be
simplified, to educate all through the physical domain (Eldar, 2008).
19
The interventions discussed within previous literature, and the possibilities that
are inherent in the subject, will work for some children, in some situations, on
some occasions. There is no watertight guarantee that, when working with
children and young people who have, by some, been labelled as „disaffected‟,
these changes will happen, if at all, in either a consistent or uniform way
(Sandford, Armour and Warmington, 2006; and Sandford et al., 2008). It is one
of, or a combination of, PE‟s curricular structures, lesson content, didactic
practices, and the environmental structures inherent and consistent in any PE
class, which contribute in some way to the outcomes cited throughout this
study. Any attempt to deduce which of these forces is responsible for each
respective benefit would entail a cause-effect discussion so broad and complex
that, to be completed with appropriate scientific rigour, would result in the
research effectively negating the importance of ecological validity by being
taken out of educational environments.
2.3.2 Aims, Purposes and Context of Physical Education
Physical education is one of few National Curriculum subjects, whose inherent
motives, structures, pedagogies and content lend themselves to the opportunity
for a holistic and developmental programme of activities, which go some way in
fostering social attributes. Indeed, Ofsted (2006c) cited examples of the subject
both as a vehicle to endorse appropriate behaviour and one which helps to
reduce inappropriate behaviours. It is the subject‟s varied content, which often
helps to justify it as a core element of the National Curriculum. This was
perceived to come through its capacity to both develop varied physical skills
and to facilitate the development of human excellences (Parry, 1998).
The subject has in the past been recognised as having many distinctive
features within the educational process with characteristics, which no other
learning or school experience shares (Talbot, 1999). The subject is now also
often seen by many as playing an important role in achieving broader
educational objectives other than just its traditional physical competency
foundation. Bailey (2006) has provided a wide ranging scientific summary of the
20
many benefits, which have been shown to occur. Whilst sounding a note of
caution that these benefits are by no means automatic, Bailey (2006)
recognises that PE has potential to contribute to the education and
development of children and young people in many ways. Bailey, Armour, Kirk,
Jess, Pickup, Sandford, and the BERA Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy
Special Interest Group (2008) developed this summary into a further review,
which showed that although much further research was required to evidence
some of the claims made against the subject, „there is a prevailing belief that
engagement in physical education and school sport is, somehow, a good thing‟
(p.15).
Talbot (2008) speaks of the place of PE within an „integrated curricula‟ that
recognises its‟ „distinctive contribution‟ (p.8). The rhetoric surrounding the
contribution of the subject has long been a matter of discussion within PE
research literature. Kay (1998) has previously maintained that important as
immediate products of physical education are, they remain short term goals in
the overall context of the teachers‟ role at school. He has since continued this in
his discussion that PE should be carried out with and for pupils (Kay, 2003,
original emphasis), with long term aims including not only continued
participation in activities throughout life, but also now with an appreciation of a
wide variety of considered, holistic and interdisciplinary benefits. The effects of
PE are no longer seen as being merely part of the relatively short lived
curriculum for children of school age. Its unique contribution to lifelong learning
and education has been acknowledged by Doll-Tepper, (2005), who spoke of
the indispensable role of PE in the education process. It is also now appreciated
more widely as playing an important role in achieving broader educational
objectives such as whole school improvement, community development and
effecting personal behavioural and attitudinal change among pupils (Houlihan
and Green, 2006).
The subject is in a relatively unique and indispensable position from which it can
have a reciprocal relationship and hence, a responsibility in some way
21
addressing many contemporary issues. Without claiming too much in the name
of NCPE, there remains an important role for the subject to play in providing
young people with a holistic knowledge, understanding, and social skills to
ensure physical activity (of some kind) becomes a regular aspect of their daily
life (Fairclough and Stratton, 2005). Values generally related to the ethical
principles of fairness and honesty have long been internal, built in, logically
constitutive features of the games and sports, which feature prominently in the
familiar physical education curriculum (Reid, 1997). Whilst it has been widely
accepted that PE is a subject, which affords opportunities for a great number of
valuable outcomes such as these, it is inevitable that there continues to be a
debate about where the priority within the subject should lie (Whitehead, 2000).
McNamee (2005) has discussed how the value arguments for PE ought not to
be erected on exactly the same grounds as other curriculum subjects that are
palpably different in nature. Indeed, the contested nature and purpose of PE is
often dominated by wider educational and philosophical agendas. Historically,
the inclusion of PE as a curriculum subject has been justified on the basis of
broad and diverse goals of physical, social, and moral development (Sallis and
McKenzie, 1991). These are goals that many other subjects cannot lay claim to.
Despite the relatively active characteristics of other practical subjects, including
drama and the arts for example, active participation in PE involves learning that
is unique to the physical domain. The distinctive nature of PE has been
postulated, therefore, to result in a range of outcomes that are not seen as
being inherently possible in other curriculum subjects.
The possibility of NCPE producing profound affective gains in individuals has
led to intervention based research being conducted in physical activity contexts.
A conscious effort to implement such an intervention, which was designed to
enhance empathy, moral reasoning, and personal responsibility, was conducted
by Miller, Bredemeier and Shields (1997). Reflecting the authors‟ belief that PE
is a rich context for promoting socio-moral education, their interventions centred
on promoting social interdependence, moral atmosphere, motivational climate,
22
and power relations. Through purely anecdotal discussions and observations,
the authors concluded that PE provided a context for enhancing socio-moral
growth. Researchers have also recognised PE as a site that is well suited to the
promotion of young people‟s social development (Lawson, 1999). Miller et al
(1997) cited how responsibility and co-operation were key features of their
socio-moral programme through PE. Moore (2002) has built upon this further by
discussing how PE has the potential to develop personal qualities such as self-
esteem, self-confidence, empathy, and compassion.
Further to the development of individual social attributes through PE, it is also
worthwhile in noting the potential opportunities for a greater sense of
socialisation into a particular culture. The processes of socialisation through
sport have been widely acknowledged, and have been defined by Coakley
(2007) as the „active process of learning and social development, which occurs
as we interact with one another and become acquainted with the social world in
which we live‟ (p.90). Despite the notable differences between the aims and
purposes of sport and physical education, the subject shares similar properties
to the interactive nature of learning and social development that occurs through
sport. When working with a specific population of children with disabilities in an
adapted PE setting, Wright, White and Gaebler-Spira (2004) re-affirmed such
beliefs, in finding that children showed positive social interactions, an increased
sense of ability and, therefore, positive feelings about an (adapted martial arts)
programme.
Such outcomes could be seen to be a positive product of the physicality and co-
operation that is required in PE. Many studies relating to the voices of children
and young people in PE, (demonstrated in section 2.3.2 below), describe the
nature of experiences in physical education to have a consistent element of
physicality. Children and young people experiencing NCPE are encouraged, by
the nature of the subject, to engage in acts that are physical and often co-
operative by design. The social aspects of this, through co-participation, have
been described above. It is also worth noting the element of catharsis that is
23
possible through engagement in this physical sense. The structured release of
energy that is expectant through active participation, (i.e. a willingness to try
their best and work to the best of their abilities (Ohman and Quennerstedt,
2008)), affords outcomes that can potentially appear demonstrable of a
reduction in off-task and obstructive behaviours (Medcalf, Marshall and Rhoden,
2006). These appear to be a product of the physical nature of participation in
PE. It is contended that, to achieve a greater understanding of such processes,
will require a consistent adoption of practices which encourage participatory
student voice.
2.3.3 Voice in Physical Education
Much has been done to investigate the factors upon which participation and
enjoyment in PE are dependent. Whilst recognising that the rhetoric behind the
subject‟s place in the curriculum has worth, the importance of this thesis is to
gain an understanding of how children experience National Curriculum physical
education. Dyson (1995) spoke of the „paucity of theoretical conceptualisation,
empirical research, and discourse of practice concerning how students
experience the curriculum or engage in learning‟ (p.394). More recently, there
is, however, an emergent broad body of knowledge that sheds light on the
attitudes of children and young people towards PE, and how the atypical
student views the subject, which are worthy of recognition. Indeed, Lord and
Jones (2006) describe how physical education is now one of a group of
subjects, which are most frequently researched from a pupil‟s perspective.
It is important to acknowledge and attempt to understand the contexts that
surround the aims and motives that children and young people have for
participation in PE. As part of a wider review, Bailey and Dismore (2004)
obtained children‟s views on the outcomes of PE and school sport, and
summarised that, in their study, PE school sport was shown to be a „distinctive,
valued and popular subject for the great majority of students‟ (p.8). It would of
course be wrong to further this claim into one that was the case for all pupils.
The nature of the subject often generates polarised experiences, which are
dependent on a great number of factors. These experiences are a product of
24
the many contributory variables, which come to affect children‟s time in PE. As
such, the experience of the child results from a kind of negotiation of these
significant factors. Groves and Laws (2000) spoke of experience as being
interactive, and a product of negotiation; it is clear that children and young
people‟s beliefs and behaviours in PE are built through an integration of
previous experiences and contextual information.
Cothran and Ennis (1998) have highlighted themes that appear indicative of the
attitudes and expectations of PE, which remain today. Despite wide-ranging
changes to NCPE of the past decade, and the fact that their research is of
American origin, their findings ring true with many other papers that follow in
this review. These include their findings that the non-educational aspects of PE
were highly valued by participants, through to the perception that it provided a
break from the other aspects of the school day. While enjoyment may not be a
primary aim of the NCPE, it may certainly be claimed to be a significant factor
affecting pupil learning (Williams, 1996). Rather than being „enjoyment‟ for its
own sake, an important corollary of such feeling is the perception regarding the
subject as having a cathartic function (Jones and Cheetham, 2001).
Rikard and Banville (2006) made a number of conclusions with regard to the
attitudes, which they found in their sample. These included the perceived need
for variety in their curriculum to avoid the boredom of „learning the same thing‟,
the desire for game-based activities, and the appreciation of elective choice in
their lesson content. Individuals‟ reciprocity to different aspects of curriculum
naturally results in polarised experiences in different programmes of study. The
differences in pupils‟ perceptions of their achievement in these different areas,
suggest that teaching styles, strategies, and curriculum organisation, are
significant factors, and entitlement for all remains at a rhetorical level (Williams
and Woodhouse, 1996).
Cothran and Ennis (1998) compared the perceived curricular goals of staff and
students. In their small scale study, they found that the teachers focused
25
primarily on the consideration that an emergence of some social responsibility
was possible through physical education. In contrast, they asserted that
students viewed the desired social outcome of PE purely to be the socialising
result of participation.
„There was a near universal acceptance among all of the young people interviewed…..that a more or less central aspect of the nature and purpose of PE was that it is a fun and enjoyable lesson in which they take part in the company of friends.‟
(Smith and Parr, 2007, p.44).
The great regard for the non-educational aspects of PE, namely the sociability
mentioned previously, has been widely acknowledged to be central to the way
in which children and young people experience NCPE. Their motives to
participate, be they task or ego orientated, or be they simply its presence as a
core curriculum subject, potentially affect their experience and the socialising
outcomes that involvement in PE can provoke. Dagkas and Stathi (2007)
discuss a number of factors, which they found adolescents related as being
contributory to such participation patterns, and to which they propose could
explain the dominant experiences described above. They identified thematic
factors of first access to provision, opportunity and location; second financial
support; and third encouragement and motivation. Smith, Thurston, Lamb and
Green (2007) corroborate such findings in their discussion of the impact of
gender, locality, and social class.
Irrespective of such factors, it has been shown that students do not grasp the
conceptual relevancy of the activities they are taught in PE (Jones and
Cheetham, 2001), resulting in a perceived disjuncture between discourses of
PE and its reality for pupils (Williams and Woodhouse, 1996). Groves (1999)
corroborates this, highlighting the weight of social relationships in class, (and
the nature of the presentation of activities). Smith and Parr (2007) have since
concluded that pupils hold an amalgam of socially constructed views, which are
framed by a number of complexities contributing to the „ways in which young
people‟s views are socially constructed‟ (p.54). This is further substantiated
26
through a narrative approach to experience, which showed an understanding
that the complex personal relationships of participants had a profound effect
upon the way in which the child functions within PE (Groves and Laws, 2003).
2.3.4 Special Educational Needs in Physical Education
Prior to discussion of the specificities of the SEBD category within SEN, it is
worth acknowledging that, more broadly, there is legislation that supports the
fundamental right to an inclusive education for all pupils with any form of SEN
(Vickerman, Hayes and Whetherly, 2003). There is an excess of such legislative
and non-statutory guidance, which has pursued this agenda. The Green Paper
on „Excellence for All‟ (Department for Education and Employment, 1997), The
Special Educational Needs and Disability Act (Department for Education and
Skills, 2001a), The Special Educational Needs Code of Practice (Department
for Education and Skills, 2001b), and, in relation to PE, the Planning for
Inclusion statement within the National Curriculum (Qualifications and
Curriculum Authority, 2007a), have each contributed in the most recent past.
The issues, which surround students with SEN in NCPE, have, hence, received
noticeable recent attention within both academia and in policy. However, Smith
(2004) points to the „long term social process‟ in his conceptualisation of current
PE provision for pupils with SEN. He speaks of the aforementioned
contemporary developments as being part of a process, which „can be traced
back as far as the mid 1800s‟ (p.40). It is not the task of this thesis to provide an
overview of such historical explanations (see for example Halliday, 1993).
Rather, concentration is on the current situation in schools, which is
experienced by those in this study.
The definition for Special Educational Needs applied in this study, used in the
DfES (2001b) Code of Practice, is actually that contained within the Education
Act (Department for Education and Employment, 1996). This describes a child
having SEN if he (or she) „has a learning difficulty which calls for special
educational provision to be made for him‟ (or her) (section 312). Despite
remaining current in the main, this definition has been somewhat supplemented
27
first by the introduction of The Special Educational Needs and Disability Act
(Department for Education and Skills, 2001a), and, more recently, by
Department for Children, Schools and Families (2008a) guidance2.
The great ranges of difficulty, which can attest to this description, are most
regularly spoken about, within physical education, alongside the literature
discussing inclusive practice. In meeting the previously mentioned inclusion
statement of the NCPE, „teachers will need to actively review the pedagogical
practices in order to ensure they meet the statutory requirements to facilitate
entitlement and accessibility to inclusive activities for all pupils, including those
with SEN‟ (Vickerman, 2007a, p.58). It is regarded that, in addressing these
requirements, there are many pragmatic and conceptual difficulties (Robertson,
Childs and Marsen, 2000).
Inclusive PE for pupils with SEN is concerned with a recognition of both the
philosophical basis of inclusion, as well as a commitment and desire to support
its implementation through both the execution of policy and a desire to change
practice (Vickerman et al., 2003, p.50). The authors further this through the
proposal of four key principles, which they believe require consideration; those
of entitlement, accessibility, integration, and integrity (Vickerman et al., 2003). It
is worth noting here the important differences between what is commonly
termed „integration‟ (whereby the child fits into a predisposed system), and
inclusion (whereby the system itself is adapted to suit the child). These issues
highlight the difficulties in what Smith and Thomas (2006b) perceive as being
the diametrically opposed policies of inclusion in its broadest sense, alongside
the emphasis within physical education on raising standards of practical
achievement.
2 As these recent pieces of guidance are present at the time of writing this thesis, their use will
continue in this study. Nonetheless, the fieldwork of this study took place in a period of transition, during which time it is reasonable to infer that this guidance would not yet have filtered through to practice. Therefore, as with the change in the physical education curriculum previously mentioned, the systems and processes within this change would not have bedded down into the educational provision of those in this study.
28
In this regard, Morley, Bailey, Tan and Cooke (2005) recognised that the
„conflict‟ inherent in a subject area that seeks to promote equity and excellence
simultaneously, is potentially magnified through needs that are physical in
nature. In turn, the challenges facing inclusive discussions in physical education
are most often spoken about within the remit of a physical need. Consequently,
in the most part, the majority of attention in published literature is paid to the
physical nature of some forms of SEN.
Smith and Green (2004) have studied teachers‟ views on the issue of inclusive
physical education. Despite only drawing upon seven purposively selected
teachers for their original study (Smith, 2004), their subsequent figurational
analysis highlighted pertinent factors, which they cite as being tentatively
indicative of a wider population (Smith and Green, 2004). They discuss the
socially constructed nature of their views and practices regarding (inclusive) PE,
and go on to conclude that the „pre-eminence of a sporting ideology in PE
teachers‟ views‟ is testimony to the local constraints, which confirm and
perpetuate, rather than challenge and change, many teachers‟ long-established
particular dispositions (Smith and Green, 2004, p.605).
Studies have highlighted how PE teachers have, in the past, recognised the
difficulties that the subject can pose to the inclusion of pupils with SEN. In this
regard, Morley et al (2005) discussed how PE teachers conceptualised the
subject as one which is significantly different from other subject areas. Their
research highlighted the perceived difficulties in teaching children with
behavioural difficulties more so than other manifestations of SEN. This has
been further discussed in the past by Parker (2002). Despite the wholehearted
support for the concept of inclusive teaching practices, the confidence to
„include‟ and teach children identified with additional needs in PE is still seen as
a great challenge (Vickerman, 2007b). Vickerman and Coates (2009) have
furthered this in their explanation of the disparity in the extent to which SEN is
holistically embedded within PE teacher training programmes.
29
Physical education has the potential to make significant contributions to the
education and development of all children and young people in many ways,
most of which are not reproducible through other areas of the curriculum, or
through other sporting or physical activities (Bailey and Dismore, 2004). Wright
and Sugden (1999) cite how, for all pupils, but especially those with SEN,
„physical education is not simply education of the physical, but also involves
education through the physical of other naturally developing attributes such as
language, cognition, socialisation, and emotions‟ (p.16). The subject‟s ability to
offer such contributions is, nevertheless, mediated by the wider social cultures
that can manifest themselves in curriculum PE. Unfortunately, „the apparent
emphasis placed upon sport and team games within the PE curriculum appears
to do rather more to exclude, than include, some pupils from particular learning
situations in PE‟ (Smith, 2004, p.51). These experiences are, hence, heavily
framed by individuals‟ special educational needs, or lack thereof.
The benefits of active participation in PE discussed previously are reconciled by
individuals‟ reciprocity to the subject. Their affinity will undoubtedly be affected
by the provisions made to address the additional needs of individuals. Most
often, research has in the past concentrated predominantly upon the application
of inclusive practices of teaching regarding the additional somatic needs of
those with a physical disability, and has negated to recognise the distinctive
subset of SEN, which is SEBD. In contrast to this, worryingly, Smith and
Thomas (2006a) highlight the fact that, actually, teachers often find it especially
difficult to include pupils who have social, emotional and behavioural difficulties.
Of significance for the rest of this thesis is the specific category of educational
need, which carries the label of SEBD.
2.4 Social, Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties
2.4.1 Definition and Categorisation of SEBD
It is important to acknowledge the array of terminology, which is used within
both research literature and policy documents regarding the categorisation and
labelling of behavioural difficulties in children and young people. However, it is
30
not within the intentions of this thesis to discuss either the merits of each of
these contested interpretations, the historical development of them, nor the
broader philosophical debates concerning the issue of „labelling‟ in education. In
aiming to provide a level of consistency throughout the thesis, the term SEBD
has been used both during the original work contained within and when directly
citing the research of others (irrespective of their original chosen terminology).
In doing so, applying consistency throughout this thesis has not ignored the fact
that the term SEBD has meant different things, at different times, to different
writers.
Vocabulary including Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties (EDB), Social,
Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties (SEBD), and more recently Behavioural,
Emotional and Social Difficulty (BESD) have developed over time and have
been used inter-changeably by professional bodies, governmental departments,
and researchers in different cultures. These do not include the historical
developments in special education, which have seen descriptors such as „moral
imbecile‟ or „maladjusted‟ used within the chronology of the development of
perspectives. The term SEBD has been chosen for use in this thesis as a result
of the developing knowledge of circumstances, which contribute to the
prevalence of these difficulties. There is a great complexity of variables, which
act as determinants, and act to influence the onset of difficulties. Such factors
are discussed later in this review. As highlighted, it is the 'social' and the
'emotional' factors, which generally give rise to the 'behaviour' (Social Emotional
and Behavioural Difficulties Association, 2006). As such, it is these factors,
which should be emphasised first in any descriptive term.
There are very few definitions of SEBD used in relation to, and alongside, the
published criteria for the clinical diagnosis of other similar conditions that often
occur in parallel to it. It is an umbrella term used to describe complex and often
chronic difficulties, and as such there are a great number of issues that can
contribute to the ascription of the term and its use in school. As behaviour is
defined within the context of social grouping, establishing both the existence
31
and identification of „difficult behaviour‟ or „emotional disorder‟ is fraught with
problems (Wearmouth and Connors, 2004). There are also many ways of
conceptualising SEBD, which are sometimes confusing and, which come from a
varied and diverse number of theoretical bases including educational-
therapeutic approaches, social models, mental health models and biologically
based perspectives (Norwich, Cooper and Maras, 2002).
The definition most often used in the schools of this study is still that given in
Circular 9/94, where children deemed to be showing signs of a social, emotional
or behavioural difficulty are described as „lying on the continuum between
behaviour which challenges teachers but is within normal, albeit unacceptable,
bounds and that which is indicative of serious mental illness‟ (Department for
Education and Employment/Department of Health, 1994, p.7). This goes on to
state that their problems are clearer and greater than sporadic naughtiness or
moodiness and yet not so great as to be classed as mental illness. As with the
aforementioned definition of SEN that is being applied in this study, the DCSF
guidance (2008a) has also, in part, superseded the DfEE circular in relation to
SEBD. As it was published during this study, although not changing the
definition that was used in the sampling of participants, it is important to
recognise the future developments that it contains in relation to legislative and
guidance updates.
The term SEBD implies a sub-group of those with SEN, whose needs can be
assessed and met with special educational provision (Travell, 1999). It has
allowed policy makers and practitioners to „bracket‟ pupils who require special
provision but do not suffer sensory-motor impairments or learning disabilities –
referring to such pupils without unduly anchoring their SEN in psycho-pathology
(Jones, 2003). There is no evidence to suggest that the different emotional and
behavioural manifestations that are given the SEBD label are related to form a
single condition, and it would be wrong to assume that there is any kind of
homogeneity in what is placed under the broad and crude heading of SEBD
(Cooper, 1999a). Despite this, the challenging nature of their externalising
32
behaviours is a common feature of the difficulties that they portray.
Commonplace within this is the manifestation of behaviours, which are socially
constructed as being inappropriate.
For these definitions and conceptualisations to apply, there is a common
acknowledgement that their difficulties should be persistent, frequent, severe
emotional or behavioural problems occurring within or across particular settings
(Ayers and Prytys, 2002). It is as a result of the Warnock Report (1978) that
increasing recognition was given to the argument that SEBD is best seen in
interactive terms; that a child‟s SEBD should be seen as the product of
unsuitable environments as well as problems of individual pathology; and that it
marked a growing acceptance of the idea that the environment was the key to
SEBD and disaffection in general (Cooper, 1999b). Cooper (1999d) continued
by discussing the loose collection of characteristics, which can define SEBD,
some of which are located within students, others of which are difficulties of the
environment in which the student operates. The most common category of need
is when these personal and environmental characteristics combine.
The concept of SEBD attempts to come to grips with the concept that
behaviour, which does not meet diagnostic criteria, sometimes poses serious
problems at school (Jones, 2003). Studies have highlighted the differential
nature of problems exhibited by students with SEBD (Nelson, Babyak,
Gonzalez and Benner, 2003). Alongside the behavioural tendencies, which
many children with SEBD share, it remains important to appreciate that more
often than not these children‟s needs are multifaceted. They are most likely
labelled with diverse and often co-morbid problems that are underpinned by
their behavioural difficulties. With this in mind, the experiences of those deemed
to portray signs of SEBD are unsurprisingly varied and multi-faceted. For
example, pupils with a range of difficulties, including emotional difficulties such
as depression and eating disorders, conduct difficulties such as oppositional
defiance disorder, hyperkinetic difficulties including attention deficit disorder or
attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, and syndromes such as Tourette‟s,
33
should be recorded as SEBD if additional or different educational arrangements
are being made to support them (Department for Education and Skills, 2005).
The aetiology of SEBD is diverse and multiple due to the wide-ranging
behaviours, which can be deemed as being classified under its umbrella. There
have been shown to be a number of factors that pre-dispose children to develop
certain difficulties, precipitating factors that then trigger the onset of difficulties
and perpetuating factors that maintain these difficulties over time and across
contexts (Ayers and Prytys, 2002). These include, amongst others, the impact
of family structures, parental and family difficulties, and stressors such as
separation, bereavement, and abuse. Other more personal pre-cursors can
include low self esteem and self-efficacy, learned helplessness, and difficulties
during developmental pathways. For these reasons, adolescence is the period
when difficulties of a social, behavioural and emotional nature are most likely to
occur (Cooper, 1999c).
Children and young people with a social, emotional or behavioural difficulty
exhibit a complex array of problem behaviours in school settings. Nelson et al
(2003) highlighted the severity and frequency of typical behaviours exhibited by
children with emotional and behavioural disorders and found that twice as many
students could be classed as exhibiting „externalising‟ behaviours (delinquent or
aggressive) than „internalising‟ (withdrawn, anxious or social problems).
Findings from this study showed the differential nature of identified problems of
students with SEBD across grade levels. The time children spend on task in
instructionally effective and productive classrooms is naturally reduced when
behaviours of a disruptive nature are present. Negative behaviours are regularly
a derivative of children with an element of SEBD and hence, strategies, which
seek to alleviate these, are often sought.
Visser and Stokes (2003) contend that it is important to differentiate between a
pupil who has a recognised educational special need, in this instance an
emotional and behavioural difficulty, and a pupil who is disaffected or
34
delinquent. The distinction between what is disruptive behaviour, and that
behaviour arising from a mental illness of any seriousness, is an important one
to make. It is in this regard that, where necessary and appropriate, an
assessment for a „statement‟ of special educational need is given through multi-
agency involvement with the child. This, in theory, highlights whether these
potential difficulties are those of diagnostic concern, or simply that of
adolescence. The SEN Code of Practice (Department for Education and Skills,
2001b) gives detailed guidance and legislation from which schools of all types in
England work towards and within. Within this code, social, emotional and
behavioural difficulties are one of four areas of need of which a child could be
diagnosed with. Due to the wide range of special educational needs, which are
frequently inter-related, individual pupils may well, and often do, have needs
that span more than one of these areas.
As outlined in the SEN Code of Practice (Department for Education and Skills,
2001b), the process of „statementing‟ is one in which the child‟s needs are
assessed by a range of services after which their additional educational needs
are then subject to being formalised. Often referred for statutory assessment by
their teacher, the choice to apply for a statement follows a graduated series of
provisions ranging from additional classroom support, „school action‟, or „school
action plus‟. It is at this stage that, if necessary and criteria have been met, a
child may be stated as having SEBD. „Statements‟ are a further statutory
entitlement of additional need, that identify and assess the needs of a child with
SEN, and, hence, allocate resources over and above those already given to the
school to meet those needs of a child with SEN (Department for Education and
Skills, 2006c). Once the process is complete, the Statement is designed to
describe the child‟s difficulties, the help required to meet these difficulties, and
specifies the type of school that can provide for these needs. The extra help a
child receives is designed to match their level of difficulty. It is worth noting that
once diagnosed with a specific behavioural difficulty, if the child is deemed only
to need (or be best suited to) the prescription of routine medication as the sole
form of provision, then he/she is not, in theory, given a „Statement‟.
35
2.4.2 Epidemiology of SEBD
The prevalence of social, emotional and behavioural difficulties in children is
escalating. The complex nature of the difficulties, coupled with involvement by
multiple agencies, creates not only a challenge for consistent measurement but
also for effective intervention (Roberts, Jacobs, Puddy, Nyre and Vernberg,
2003). Due to the wide ranging number of symptoms and conditions, which can
be classed as being under the umbrella of SEBD, citing a collection of causes
and/or possible antecedents is a wide ranging and extensive task. In the same
way that the concept can be viewed from a number of theoretical perspectives
(Ayers, Clarke and Murray, 2000), for some the root cause of their problem may
have sociological undertones, some may have psychological undertones, and
on the other hand, some conditions may manifest as a result of a biological
base.
Cole, Daniels and Visser (2003) cite the vague and incompleteness of available
national and local data describing the SEBD subgroup of SEN in the United
Kingdom, recognising the chronic difficulties in calculating precise figures given
both the differing weightings attributed to the aforementioned biological, social,
educational, psychological, or cultural explanations, and the different
perspectives of professionals working across and within different agencies cited
previously. In January 2006, 2.9% (236,200 children) of the school population
had Statements of SEN (Department for Education and Skills, 2006a). Of these,
58.7% were placed in mainstream schools (Department for Education and
Skills, 2006b), which, hence, gives justification for any study involving this
population to remain in an environment where not only are the repercussions of
their needs felt most but where most are actually placed.
Statistics, which clearly report SEN prevalence and severity, are widely
accessible (i.e. those cited above). Those of a similar credibility, which
recognise SEBD specifically, are less commonly available and detailed. This, in
part, is a result of the multiplicity of causative factors that contribute to the
relative trends of SEN (or SEBD) prevalence within different demographics of
36
society. The incidence of pupils with statements of SEN is consistently shown to
be much higher for boys (around one in every 37 children) than it is for girls
(around one in every 100) (Department for Education and Skills, 2006b).
Equally, SEN statements as a proportion of the total school population are
greatest between the ages of 12 and 15 (secondary school) (Department for
Education and Skills, 2006c).
„Research shows that the prevalence of such difficulties varies according to sex, age, health and domicile. Rates are likely to be greater in inner cities; socially deprived families (for which a narrow notion of social class is not a good proxy); boys rather than girls, children with other learning, health or developmental difficulties; adolescents as opposed to younger children; and, amongst young children, those with delayed language development. While many children cope well with adverse circumstances and events, higher rates of emotional and behavioural difficulty are also likely to feature where there is or has been parental discord or divorce; mental health problems in other family members; neglect; or significant parental coldness or irritability towards the child.‟
(Social Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties Association, 2006, p.2).
Social, emotional and behavioural difficulties tend to be more prevalent among
adolescent males living in socially and economically deprived inner city
neighbourhoods (Ayers and Prytys, 2002). The proportion of pupils known to be
eligible for free school meals, a proxy for socio-economic deprivation, is much
higher for pupils with SEN than for those without; in secondary schools,
approximately 26% of pupils with SEN (with and without statements) were
known to be eligible for free school meals compared with 11% of pupils without
(Department for Education and Skills, 2006b). Causes may also interact and
contribute towards the development of other difficulties. Increasing numbers of
longitudinal studies highlight the broad range of adverse conditions, which are
consequent on their occurrence (Lowenhoff, 2004). There is little evidence to
suggest that the different emotional and behavioural manifestations that are
given the SEBD label are related to a single condition (Cooper, 1999d).
37
2.4.3 SEBD in Context
The environment in which the child is asked to learn and behave within is a vital
factor to consider when discussing both the causes of, and responses to,
behaviour deemed to be inappropriate. Indeed, children who present difficulties
at school might not necessarily show them to a significant degree at home, and
vice versa (Norwich et al., 2002). If deviance is a rational response to the
perceived intolerable circumstances of a particular environment, then it is the
circumstances that must be changed; to change the individual to suit the
circumstances is to collude with the oppressive, and, therefore, become an
oppressor (Cooper, 1999a). Ofsted (2006a) highlighted the provision for
students with a range of learning difficulties, which discussed their difficulties in
relation to the provisions made within their learning environments. From this,
Ofsted cites that pupils determined to have SEBD faced difficulties in accessing
a suitable provision that met their needs, far more so than any other „group‟ of
students. This statement was made in comparison with students whose
difficulties included all other types of SEN („communication and interaction‟,
„cognition and learning‟, and „sensory and/or physical‟).
Cooper (1999d) highlighted that students with SEBD may often be pre-occupied
with emotional concerns to the extent that this often can interfere with their
learning process. As such, broadly speaking there is a high correlation between
children having SEN and low academic achievement (Department for Education
and Skills, 2006c). This is unsurprising considering that, by definition, the low
academic achievement, which comes from a learning difficulty, is a precursor to
the recognition of a special educational need. Such a reciprocal relationship
between academic difficulties and anti-social behaviour is highly context specific
(McEvoy and Welker, 2000) and differs in both frequency and depth between
children who have different behavioural conditions. Merrell and Tymms (2001)
corroborate these findings in their sample of children with Attention Deficit
Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD).
38
Farrell, Critchley and Mills (1999) studied the educational attainment of pupils in
schools for children with SEBD, and indicated that major problems in literacy
and numeracy were often evident. They cite the implications for teaching
approaches and early interventions that this complex inter-relationship between
behaviour problems and learning brings. There is much further research that
highlights the correlation between the incidence of SEBD and communication
difficulties (see for example Bott, Farmer and Rohde (1997) and Kevan (2003)).
The consequences of disruptive behaviours are also multi-faceted (Vogler and
Bishop, 1990) and go beyond any impact on just the individual in question. The
perceptions of disruptive and undesirable behaviours held by teachers, pupils,
and parents receive high levels of attention in published sources. Historically,
secondary school teachers frequently cite inappropriate classroom behaviour as
one of their major problems (Elton, 1989), of which „talking out of turn‟ and
„hindering other people‟ are widely recognised as being the most problematic
(Houghton, Wheldall and Merrett, 1988). Outward „naughtiness‟ and disruptive
behaviour often dominates the perceptions of teachers, masking the view of a
child‟s underlying emotional difficulties and the need for differentiated
responses (Cole, Visser and Daniels, 1999).
„The most commonly cited forms of behavioural disturbance in classrooms take the form of unauthorised student talk, the hindrance of other pupils from working as well as forms of student behaviour that directly challenge the authority of the teacher. The energy that is devoted to such behaviours is often at the expense of „legitimate‟ classroom behaviour, and consequently tends to attract the negative attention of teachers in the form of reprimands and punishments.‟
(Cooper, 1999d, p.10).
This theme has been more recently shown in the work of Steer (2008), who
again found that frequent low-level disruptions are the most common
interruption to learning, and, further, can escalate into more serious classroom
management difficulties. As such, the often high frequencies across settings of
such relatively trivial misbehaviours are also of regular concern to teachers.
39
2.4.4 SEBD and Pupil Voice
As with other fields of participatory „voice‟ research, there is a growing number
of studies, which recognise and facilitate the involvement of children with
special educational needs, specific learning difficulties, and social, emotional
and behavioural difficulties. Cooper and Shea (1998) have done just this,
studying the perceptions, which children and young people hold of ADHD. The
highly complex nature of their responses „indicates the poverty of simplistic
responses‟ to the situation (p.47). The experiences of „John‟ and Cooper
(2006)3 provide yet greater depth in understanding the „personal dimensions‟ of
SEBD (p.11). Such insights are of use in our understanding of the realities
which are faced by those given the label of SEBD, and provide useful context in
the discussion of the antecedents that contribute to their behaviours.
Wise (2000) studied „the hidden words of (her) pupils minds‟ (p.9). Her work
with pupils described as having SEBD gives a valuable insight into the ways in
which they experience schooling. It provides an understanding of how children
schooled in special educational establishments perceived the factors, which
contributed to their behaviours. They spoke about the effect of schooling, the
socio-cultural effects of the family and others, and their perceptions of their
individual psychology and physiology. More so than any other study of voice
and experience, Wise (2000) has demonstrated the true worth and importance
of the highly situated requirement to understand a child‟s experiences in the
hope of improving their access to education and subsequent achievement.
Undesirable behaviours are regularly cited as a negative derivative of children
with an element of social, emotional and behavioural difficulties, and as such
the child‟s inclusion in a mainstream classroom, in which there is the potential to
affect many other children, attracts substantial debate. Supaporn (2000) found
that the three factors that most students mentioned as being related to
misbehaviour were peer group, type of activity, and enjoyment of the activity. In 3 The referencing of a forename in this way is in relation to the authorship of the text in
question. „John‟ is a pseudonym for a young man who understands SEBD „from the inside‟, and who is listed as a contributor to a number of chapters within an edited book. It, therefore, also appears in the reference list of this thesis in the same way.
40
their study, „harassment‟ was the most cited category of behaviours that
students deemed to be frequently occurring within their classes. Students also
discussed most misbehaviour incidents as contextualised accounts involving
what teachers did in classes and how students responded. Whether these
behaviours emanate from one or a number of these many conditions is an
irrelevance in practice. It is contended in this study that appreciation and
interpretation of the many factors, which contribute to the manifestations of
displayed behaviours, and the consequential impact of these actions, are best
investigated through the narrative of those children and young people who
exhibit such problems.
Woolfson, Harker, Lowe, Shields and Mackintosh (2007) discuss how
consultation with children who have disabilities can be meaningful and effective
when appropriate methods are used. There are, however, many challenges in
doing so (Lewis, 2002). Ravet (2007) highlights the methodological challenges
when working with, „disaffected‟ young people, which supersede the idealised
linear, logical, straightforward notion of voice. She makes further reference to
the concern that these students may well be so „conditioned by culture and
context towards docility and conformity‟ (p.240) that their accounts may be
skewed as a reflection of this.
2.5 Physical Activity and SEBD
There have been relatively few previous studies that have combined the fields
of PE and SEBD, and as such very little attention has been paid to the use of
some form of education through physical means as acting as a behavioural
intervention for those with SEBD. It has been recorded how the child with SEBD
often reacts positively to alternatives to classroom based theory lessons. A
curriculum, which concentrates on practical, physical, and creative experiences,
would often be more effective in meeting the needs of pupils with SEBD (Cole
and Visser, 1998). On this theme, Hunter-Carsch (2006) comments how
41
„the arts permit transcendence of our routine particular roles…….for some youngsters (and perhaps particularly those with SEBD) it can be easier to work with different, perhaps more accessible forms of „reading‟ and „literacy‟ such as can be offered through the arts.‟
(Hunter-Carsch, 2006, p.48).
The same can be said for learning in a physical context through PE. Activities,
which are physical in nature, can potentially induce many positive educational
and behavioural outcomes. The reported research that follows in this review has
attempted to bridge the boundaries between that learned through physical
education, and potential behavioural improvements, which may be seen as a
consequence. As is discussed below, these papers often have one of two
limiting factors. Studies attempting to measure the relationship between
physical movements, and externalising behaviours, without consultation with the
children and young people themselves, are often either largely removed from
the school-based PE environment, or they have employed methods that negate
many of the possible mechanisms from which changes may well have taken
place, as explained in the following illustrations.
Luce, Delquadri and Hall (1980) provide the first of these examples of such
limiting research practices, with their attempt at suppressing excessive
frequencies of verbal outbursts and aggressive tendencies through „contingent
exercise‟ as a punishment for children described as being severely emotionally
disturbed. A series of physical tasks centred on repeatedly standing up and
sitting down on the floor ten times. These punishments were required of two 7
and 10 year old boys, if they engaged in inappropriate behaviours. The authors
concluded that their results demonstrated how contingent exercise was an
effective reprimand procedure, which replicated movements the participants
might engage in during their times of play. They thus proposed that physical
activities could be used as punishment, to suppress future behaviours. To think
of learning through the physical as castigation for challenging actions, greatly
ignores the potential outcomes of its place in their education, aside from any
demonstration of undesirable behaviours.
42
The same can be said for the case study by Etscheidt and Ayllon (1987). When
working with a thirteen year old child diagnosed as having hyperactivity and
distractibility problems, they intervened by way of five minutes of prescribed
exercises with a „therapist‟. If the child had behaved badly in the morning, then
exercise was „prescribed‟ in place of his time in the playground. It was also
discussed how, if he had worked well in the morning, then his energy levels are
obviously „about right‟, so there was no need for him to work off energy and he
could go to the playground. The potential for the benefits of this exercise
coming through his playground time was not discussed, nor were the social
benefits of such an option.
Evans, Evans, Schmid and Pennypacker (1985) researched the potential
therapeutic benefits of a physical activity intervention and found it to be of great
use to behaviourally disordered children. Their methods again neglected to
consider the socially facilitative nature of physical activity in that each of the
subjects exercised alone so that social facilitation was not able to inadvertently
„contaminate‟ the effects that were shown. The restrictive experimental
procedures employed account for the study failing to appreciate the additional
benefits, or possible weaknesses, which could have been found had they
employed a method with greater ecological validity.
It is worth recognising that the date(s) of the studies discussed thus far
demonstrates some of the historical developments of research in this field.
Historically, the methods employed in these previous studies have most often
been their restricting factor. The apparent limitations of adopting an
experimental research design, which neglects to pay due regard for the
richness of educational environments, has reduced their subsequent
applicability to the child, pedagogy, and policy. The reliance on intervention
studies of positivist design is not practical for implementation or replication in an
educational setting, where such levels of manipulation are not afforded. Other
research papers since, such as those to follow, have been more specific in their
sampling, akin to the much publicised burgeoning nature of the clinical referral
43
of many behavioural difficulties. However, many of their methods have retained
a gross lack of participatory voice.
Through working with a child diagnosed with ADHD, Silverstein and Allison
(1994) researched the effectiveness of both „antecedent‟ exercise and
Methylphenidate (Ritalin) in the reduction of externalised hyperactive
behaviours. Their study, of a single three year old boy, found exercise to result
in more hyperactive behaviours, in comparison with a chemical stimulant of the
central nervous system. Methodologically, such results remain unsurprising
given the extraordinarily young age of the child, and the requirement for this
child to jog for 20 minutes. It is highly predictable that the participants‟
behaviours might change in a very different way to those evident after
prescription of a stimulant prescription. Silverstein and Allison (1994) described
how the child disliked the repetitiveness of the exercise and often tried to
escape the treatment. This may of course have contributed to the observed
behaviours, although the authors offer no explanation as to why they continued
with the disliked intervention.
Tantillo, Kesick, Hynd and Dishman (2002) followed in a similar vein: working
with eight to twelve year old children using „sub maximal‟ exercise on exercise
treadmills as their intervention. They were concerned with measuring the
children on numerous physiological scales (such as the rate of spontaneous
eye blinks). Sporadic and inconsistent results showed only limited support for
these claims, primarily because there was a lack of uniformity between the
findings achieved for boys and girls. Their findings suggested that exercise has
some efficacy in treating ADHD behaviours. Notwithstanding these findings,
they indicated how the „methods (they) used do not permit the conclusion‟ that
exercise has an effect (p.210). Any attempt to deduce which of many variables
is responsible for the observed (minimal) physiological changes would entail the
discussion of a causal relationship, which will always be difficult to establish.
Tantillo et al. (2002) have attempted to control experimental variables by
grounding their study in clinical environment. In having done so, they have
44
overlooked variables and mechanisms that may have an effect within a school
setting.
Each of these studies has merit in their own right, as pieces of research that
contribute to the case for curricula that meet the needs of children and young
people who have behavioural difficulties. However, their unifying lack of
ecological validity removes the conclusions that they make from being practical
to the child‟s educational setting. The conclusions drawn actually bear little
relevance to the schooling or experiences of the participants. By removing the
contextual relevance of a classroom environment, Cooper (2006) contends that
many of these interventions neglect to appreciate that it may be this, (the
environment), which creates the difficulty in the first place. More so, what each
of those above, have not considered is, as previously argued, the importance of
participatory student voice. By engaging in behavioural interventions without
regard for consultation with their „subjects‟, the authors have effectively negated
to offer any opportunity for social validation of their methods or outcomes.
2.6 Voice, SEBD and PE
Thus far, this review has considered the ideological framework, which guides
inclusive education and participatory voice. It has given an overview of the key
characteristics of physical education and social, emotional and behavioural
difficulties. Further to this, it has considered the relationship between these two
fields of special and physical education.
Broadly speaking, what research has yet to do is to assess the above themes,
alongside the appreciation of voice, when working with children who are
described as having SEBD, in physical education. Very few studies have
combined these fields. As has been previously argued, there is much written
about physical disabilities as the most visible manifestation of SEN in PE
(Fitzgerald, 2006; Fitzgerald and Jobling, 2004). The experiences of those with
such difficulties have been studied by Goodwin and Watkinson (2000), Kristen,
Patriksson and Fridlund (2002), Fitzgerald (2005) and Goodwin (2007). These
45
studies cite a range of contrasting experiences, including a spectrum of feelings
from difference and estrangement, self doubt, acceptance, discrimination, to the
enjoyment gained from socialising whilst strengthening their physique. Despite
providing a foundation upon which to contrast the experiences within this study,
these worthy additions to the field pay little direct contribution to the potentially
very different experiences of those with SEBD.
Fitzgerald, Jobling and Kirk (2003b) went some way in attempting to work with
students who have additional needs, when researching the physical education
experiences of children and young people with severe learning difficulties
through student led research. Fitzgerald, Jobling and Kirk (2003a) furthered this
with a thoughtful task-based approach to the research question, which does not
offer, and nor does it claim to, a longitudinal and grounded approach to the
study of their views and experiences. Despite the merits of this research, the
sampling of students described as having „learning difficulties‟, and the contrast
between them and those with SEBD, are also worthy of recognition.
The most recent and relevant review into the PE experiences of children and
young people with SEN has been that given by Coates and Vickerman (2008).
Without the use of primary data, the authors give a broad overview of the field,
making reference to many of the studies included in this review. Their study
does not mention the subset of SEBD, reflecting the dominance of papers
pertaining to physical disabilities, as is acknowledged in their discussion.
„It is not possible for teachers to personalise PE programmes without knowledge of the child‟s needs and abilities, and it is the children themselves who know these needs and abilities better than anyone else. As such, it is necessary for researchers to consult with children with special educational needs about their experiences of PE.‟
(Coates and Vickerman, 2008, p.175).
46
2.7 Summary
This review has shown that within the ways in which previous accounts of
experiences in PE have been reported are culturally framed constructions of
meaning that mediate and affect the responses which each have given.
Participation (and experience) has been shown by previous literature to be
circumscribed in a variety of ways by gender, social class, and the school
(Smith et al., 2007). Furthermore, people‟s actions and participation in PE are
both enabled and constrained by the complex networks of inter-dependent
people in schools (Smith et al., 2007). As such, to recognise this, there is a
seemingly obvious requirement for an appropriate level of ecological validity to
exist. There is the need for methods that can pay reference to the concept that
participants‟ experiences are born of multifaceted environments.
Despite the noteworthiness of papers in this review, and irrespective of the
relative corroboration between a range of studies, many share a common
weakness. When assessing how participants come to speak of their current
understanding, the importance of recognising the context of their experiences is
somewhat lost when adopting the use of questionnaires across a large sample
of participants. Such methods can in no way replicate the cultural interplays that
must be documented during the analysis of the origins of their knowledge.
Consequently, these findings have not furthered the understanding of school
experiences any more so than the experimental (modernist) studies, which have
been discussed previously in section 2.5. The apparent limited
acknowledgement of this, in the studies reported in this summary, drive the
need for a meaningful study, which places the contextualised individual voice at
the heart of our understanding.
It is worth recognising that, in addition to the critique of methods used by
studies in this review, a large number of papers are not solely related to the
child with SEN as it is now known, let alone those within the SEBD sub-set of
such a label. A review of participants, which the papers of the current and
preceding subsections have included, shows that the majority have taken a
47
broader approach to sampling. For example, a number of the studies, discussed
as a result of the absence of other more relevant papers, sampled populations
of participants with hyperactive behavioural tendencies and, in places, ADHD
(Merrell and Tymms, 2001; Norwich et al., 2002; Tantillo et al., 2002). As a
condition that is often described in physical terms, through the externalising
behaviours that it is often associated with, it is unsurprising that a physical
solution was often sought.
Consequently not all of the studies in this review can be taken as truly specific
to the child deemed to have SEBD. The issues of sampling mean that their
findings tend to generalise experiences, often without recognition of a diverse
cohort of children and young people. Despite their resonance to the principles
and aims that underpin this study, of recognising voice and understanding the
physical culture of PE, accepting their conclusions as being appropriate to all
would not do justice to the specific difficulties that such the label of SEBD can
represent. By not compensating for the specificities of participants difficulties,
the distinction between the ways in which they might experience physical
education has been lost. These notable discrepancies, in part, account for the
fallow fields upon which this research stands. It is only through a more
meaningful and inductive methodology that the experiences of individuals can
be appreciated within the context of their origin.
48
Chapter Three: Methodology
As indicated in the introduction, this study aims to explore an interpretive
approach to the physical education experiences of children with SEBD. These
aims remain mindful of the discrete and broad methodological challenges that
are faced when conducting research with people who experience contextualised
learning difficulties (Nind, 2008). This chapter, therefore, further discusses this
rationale through the principles upon which this research has been founded.
The interpretive and participatory ideologies, witnessed throughout the literature
review, have provided the benchmark for the ways in which the achievement of
these aims has been approached. Consequently, this chapter develops the
ways in which the author‟s own personal values affect the subsequent
interpretation of the participants‟ voice.
3.1 Methodology
The importance placed upon the notion of voice within this research is grounded
in the requirements and purposes of the objectives of this study. When building
upon the work of others, and adopting similar (inclusive) ideologies to those
used widely in research concerning pupil voice, the dominant factor is often an
appreciation of participants‟ empirical explanations of experience. As Groves
(1999) highlights, a study such as this deals with a nexus of components that
constitute the person as a whole; the concern thus being the relationship
children have with themselves and their learning environment. The empiricist
knowledge of these factors can only ever be a derivative of the individual
stories.
Consequently, to gain an understanding of individuals‟ perceptions is to
appreciate their stories within an interpretive and naturalistic methodological
design. Hence, the methods within this research are grounded within the
notions of these frameworks. Underpinning this rationale is a belief that to
understand the subjective world of human experiences requires a personal and
unique interpretation, which often goes beyond that of a research design
49
steeped in positivist traditions. Questions appropriate to interpretive inquiry
allow researchers to link participants‟ meanings and actions in ways that may
offer insightful explanations of events (Macdonald, Kirk, Metzler, Nilges,
Schempp and Wright, 2002) and in ways, which are not possible through the
use of alternative (positivist) methods.
„Interpretive practice engages both the how‟s and the what‟s of social reality; it is centred in both how people methodologically construct their experiences and their worlds, and in the configurations of meaning and institutional life that inform and shape their reality-constituting activity‟
(Holstein and Gubrium, 2005, p.484, original emphasis).
This interpretative methodology is congruent with the fundamental
epistemological and methodological characteristic that social organisations are
constructed on purposeful actions of individuals as they negotiate their social
roles and define status within a group. The rubric of such an approach is to aim
for an understanding of another person‟s world through appreciating how others
construct meanings of their world.
„In practice - in making research as part of a lived world – it is not possible to study „society and the social system‟ without at least some interactive notion of and reference to „the individual‟; or to „generalise from the specific‟ without in some ways „interpreting [that] specific‟‟
(Clough and Nutbrown, 2007 p.16).
Humans act, and behave, in accordance with their individual and subjective
understanding of their world (Pope, 2006) and, as such, the truths and
associated meanings to which they make reference are deemed to be socially
constructed. Interpretative research can shed light on the problem, testing out
the complexities and pointing towards how it might be tackled by practitioners in
policy and pedagogy (Edwards, 2002). On such grounds, the interpretive
orientation conceives multiple realities, each of which is relative to a particular
individual context (Sparkes, 1994; Pope, 2006).
50
„Traditional positivist researchers are frequently working to find a single, testable truth. Interpretive researchers, however, support the notion of multiple truths. That is, truth is seen as a social construction and inextricably linked to the meanings of the study‟s participants.‟
(Macdonald et al., 2002, p.140).
Positivist methodologies characterised by their experimental control of
behaviours, bare little resonance in relation to the research aims of this study.
As has been previously discussed, such controls remove the ecological validity
of behaviours so far as to make their conclusions meaningless to the aims of
this research. It is difficult to imagine any human behaviour, which is not heavily
mediated by the context in which it occurs and which is the founding
understanding of a naturalistic approach to interpretation (Lincoln and Guba,
1985). However, rather than simply making use of naturally occurring data
within this naturalistic approach, in a way akin to ethno-methodological
approaches (Garfinkel, 1967), the methods used to understand culturally
engineered experiences are appropriate to humanly implemented enquiry
(Lincoln and Guba, 1985). The study of phenomena through their natural setting
is vital to the justification of an interpretivist philosophy (Pope, 2006) and the
methods that are then employed. Silk, Andrews and Mason (2005) note how
research built upon interpretivist footings founds itself on the premise that „the
social world is complex, that researchers and subjects are fundamentally and
subjectively attached to the world‟ (p.7).
By exploring these individual contexts and truths, research within an interpretive
framework most commonly involves an intensely interactive and personal
process of engagement (Sparkes, 1994). This is most effectively achieved
through methods, which afford the opportunity to watch, listen, empathise, learn
about perspectives, make sense of experiences, and share understanding of
meaningful interpretations. A study appreciating the educative experiences of
children and young people requires the application of a great number of
research principles. Any research striving for an understanding of children‟s
experiences, through the vehicle of physical education, requires both the
recognition of each individual‟s story, and an adoption of the collective mass of
51
experiences. Moreover, when such studies take their inspiration from the child
deemed to have a social, emotional, or behavioural difficulty, there is the
requirement for an approach that is appreciative of the highly individualised
nature of their difficulties, and the highly contextualised experiences, which
result from their time in physical education.
3.2 The ‘Construction’ of Theory
The use of conceptual models to explain phenomena is widely regarded as a
seminal ingredient of the design and analysis of research outputs. Indeed
Evans and Davies (2002) call for research, which is „theoretically rigorous,
cumulative, and comprehensive in focus‟ (p.17). Nevertheless, O‟Sullivan
(2007) points to the difficulties faced when research becomes over theorised,
and hence under applied in nature. Indeed, Green (2008) spoke about the
complications that arise when principles and experiences are clouded by
theoretical sectarianism, which is often used to orientate thoughts at the outset
of research. Such a matter of fact is countered through the principles of
interpretivist research, which allows for the experiences to be theorised through
the data itself.
As O‟Sullivan (2007) goes on to highlight, regardless of the type of research
being carried out, there is the need to link it to some conceptual frame. Hence,
rather than being highly theorised or orientated from the outset, instead, the
framework for this research is constructed by the data which emerges. Denzin
and Lincoln (2005b) discuss „the open ended nature of the qualitative research
project which leads to a perpetual resistance against attempts to impose a
single, umbrella like paradigm over the entire project„ (p. xv). However, the
epistemology of qualitative researchers can often broadly be described as
having existential and constructivist characteristics (Pope, 2006).
Social constructivism has received attention in methodological texts concerning
both physical education (Rovegno, 1998) and special education (Trent, Artiles
and Englert, 1998). This emerging approach is viewed in terms of its interpretive
52
practice: „the constellation of procedures, conditions, and resources through
which reality is apprehended, understood, organised, and conveyed in everyday
life‟ (Holstein and Gubrium, 2005, p.484). A constructionist approach concerns
itself with recognising and documenting the way in which „accounts are part of
the world which they describe‟ (Silverman, 2006, p.129). Moreover,
constructivists recognise that both prior experiences, and experiential
repertoires, contribute to the ways and means by which students learn (Brooks
and Brooks, 2004).
„Constructionism is the view that all knowledge, and therefore all meaningful reality as such, is contingent upon human practices, being constructed in and out of interaction between human beings and their world, and developed and transmitted within an essentially social context.‟
(Crotty, 1998, p.42).
A social constructivist approach is valuable insofar as it „draws attention to the
fact that experience is never “raw”, but is embedded in the social web of
interpretation and re-interpretation‟ (Kitzinger, 2004, p.128). Its critique of the
long-standing traditions of empiricist (positivist) science is rooted in the view
that scientific claims to knowledge are not, as purposed, uncontaminated by
culture, history, or ideology (Gergen, 2001).
„Experience addresses the ongoingness (sic) of life as it is registered through the filter of culture. That is, through acts we have already learned to interpret as experiences or….through acts we reprocess as experiences after the fact, by talking about them and thus making them seem less personal, more typical.‟
(Abrahams, 1986, p.55).
The justifications, which participants give for their personal interpretations of
knowledge, are instead recognised as being bound by the individual and unique
contexts, which have been manufactured through the nexus of their previous
experience. Green, Kelly, Castanheira, Esch, Frank, Hodel, Putney and Rodarte
(1996) discuss the inter-disciplinary knowledge base, which social constructivist
research often draws upon, reflecting the ontological, epistemological, and
methodological constructs and commitments that research communities bring to
53
the research. Rovegno (1998) alludes to these prior experiences and
knowledge as influencing what is learned in the present, alongside the socio-
cultural context, and the activity in which the individual is engaged.
Within the principles of constructionism, the social context mediates and
impacts upon both thinking and learning (Azzarito and Ennis, 2003). In turn, the
knowledge that participants have of themselves and their experiences, is
framed by the cultures in which they have lived.
„The study of social phenomena…..requires an understanding of the social world which people have constructed and which they reproduce through their continuing activities. However, people are constantly involved in interpreting their world – social situations, other people‟s behaviour, their own behaviour….they have ideas about what is relevant for making sense of these activities.‟
(Blaikie, 1993, p.36).
Thus there is a focus on the „social construction of subjectivity‟ (Layder, 2006,
p.144). Rather than themes emerging strictly and solely from the data itself, as
envisaged by the traditional grounded theorists (Glaser and Strauss, 1967), a
constructionist view of this process accounts for the researcher creating the
themes through an interaction with the data (Charmaz, 2005).
Kelly and Norwich (2004) purported that, though personal values may be
influenced by internalised social values, the emotional responses demonstrated
by their participants seemingly came from an active internal comparison
process. The coherence (or otherwise) between their responses over time is
seen as a matter of internal relations, as opposed to the degree of
correspondence with some external reality (Sparkes, 1994). The co-existence of
truths, each itself deemed trustworthy as conditioned by time and space, is
recognition of the hermeneutical process whereby the sum of multiple
expressions can give, as Sparkes describes, a broader view of culture.
54
Sparkes (1994) speaks about the „coherence theory of truth‟, in which the basis
of trust is social agreement; what is judged to be true or trustworthy is what we
can agree as being so, conditioned by time and space. He continues,
„…within what is essentially a hermeneutical process that has no definite beginning or end…..there can be many interpretations of the same event. Likewise, there is always the possibility of one interpretation co-existing with other interpretations in such a way that a richer and broader view of culture is given that could be provided by any one interpretation alone.‟
(Sparkes, 1994, p.14).
Within a coherence theory of truth, a proposition is judged to be true if it
coheres (is connected and consistent) with other propositions in a scheme or
network that is in operation at a particular time. The „internal relations‟, which
contribute to these formulations of perception, were shown in this study to be
fixed in time and context specific.
The conditioning of this knowledge has, as its justification, support from
constructionist epistemologies which speak of multiple truths, or meanings,
existing „in and out of our engagement with the realities in our world‟ (Crotty,
1998, p.8). The construction of truths, mediated by time and space, hence
require an acknowledgement of time laden engagement with situated and
learned experiences; as Lave and Wenger (1991) would describe as being in
the context of a changing shared practice.
It is in the regard of multiple truths that this study demonstrates sympathy with
the claim that „the real‟ are „traced to processes of relationship and hence,
there is no extra cultural means of ultimately privileging one construction of
reality over another‟ (Gergen, 2001, p.8). Such „processes of relationship‟ are
demonstrable of the social constructions that define experience, yielding
multiple interpretations of these „realities‟, which participants speak of
experiencing. It is worth remembering that when multiple interpretations of
these individual, yet shared practices, are combined, to represent a collective
and thematic mass, despite each remaining as being „learned‟ in their own right,
55
the time laden and contextualised nature of the experiences as initially reported
is, in someway, lost. Despite experience being compared in such a way, their
individual context remains recognised throughout the interpretation given in
chapter six.
3.2.1 Socio-Cultural Construction of Language
As this study is based upon the interpretation of textual data, there is worth in
briefly recognising the origins of the language that is chosen by participants to
portray their experiences. The central feature of this interpretation is an
acknowledgement of the place that the social world has within the construction
of this language and understanding (Smith, 1996). The historical development
of the meaning of language in this way has been led predominantly by the work
of Vygotsky. It is not the place of this thesis to examine in depth about the
development of his work; nevertheless it is appropriate to include mention of his
work and its relevance to this study.
Vygotsky argues that social factors and social interaction contribute to the
development of thought and language (Stuart-Hamilton, 1999). The focus on
socially elaborated learning in Vygotsky‟s work (John-Steiner and Souberman,
1978) attempts to recognise the relationship between the social, and the
individual, within the development and use of their language.
„In Thought and Language Vygotsky presents a sophisticated argument demonstrating that language, the very means by which reflection and elaboration of experience takes place, is a highly personal and at the same time a profoundly social human process. He sees the relation between the individual and the society as a dialectical process which, like a river and its tributaries, combines and separates the different elements of human life. They are never frozen polarities to him‟
(John-Steiner and Souberman, 1978, p.126, original emphasis).
Minick (1996) highlights the importance of social practice and social interaction
that exists within such use of language. The context of both such factors
56
mediates the analysis of the meanings that are inextricably attached to the use
of language.
„Within the analysis of the semiotic mode of mediation, speech, the most powerful and pervasive of semiotic devices, functions as a psychological tool in the construction of individual consciousness. The social does not become individual by a process of simple transmission. Individuals construct their own sense from socially available meanings.‟
(Daniels, 1996, p.10).
These mediating forces, broadly social, cultural and historical factors, have
been the basis of much of Vygotsky‟s work. Other mediators that contribute to
such meaning include the importance of symbols that exist as artefacts in the
landscapes of study. Indeed, „the means of mediation that have tended to
dominate recent discussions are cultural artefacts such as speech or activity‟
(Daniels, 2006, p.39). Generalisations in this regard „derive from the tacit
knowledge of how things are, why they are, how people feel about them, and
how these things are likely to be later or in other places with which this person
is familiar‟ (Stake, 1978, p.6).
The powers of reasoning, that come to guide the construction of language are,
in Vygotsky‟s perception, heavily dependent upon the socio-cultural context in
which they exist (Hundiede, 1985). Vygotsky (1981) cited in Daniels (1996)
speaks of how „social relations or relations among people genetically underlie
all higher functions and their relationships‟ (p.6). This point has great resonance
when seeking to study the educational experiences of children and young
people. It follows, that there is the need to be appreciative of methods that do
more than adopt a stimulus-response framework. Vygotsky (1978) speaks of
such a framework as a limitation that is a „built-in feature of the experimental
method as it was generally accepted‟ (p.60).
Evans (1993) discussed the implications of Vygotsky‟s work in special
education, and highlights the heuristic value of analysing the localised systems
that come to create culturally bound definitions of learning difficulties, which
57
hence have an impact upon the teaching of these difficulties. Daniels (2006)
further suggested that when such a cultural artefact takes the form of a
pedagogic discourse, there is the need to then analyse its structure in the
context of its production. Although not engaging in strict discourse analysis in
this study (see analysis section 4.5); the recognition of the place of language,
as a cultural artefact within class, demonstrates the worth of interpreting the
experiences of children and young people through their own choice of
language. The individual and interpersonal relations that exist between these
factors, and the ways in which these are communicated, are a representation of
such experiences.
3.2.2 Symbolic Interactionism
This study is appreciative of the fact that participants will „communicate what
they learn through symbols, the most common system of symbols being
language‟ (Berg, 2007, p.10). The meaningful concept of „multiple realities‟
discussed previously are framed by the symbols of language, which define
individual experiences. Linguistic symbols amount to arbitrary sounds or
physical gestures to which people, by mutual agreement over time, have
attached significance or meaning (Berg, 2007). The knowledge and
understanding of experiences that children and young people have of their
worlds, and in this instance of their education, are understood as being
mediated by this, and other cultural symbols. Hence; it follows that these
subjective constructions of knowledge, are constructed symbolically, in relation
to a contextual time and place. Such symbols of experience are not the sole
point of interest. Rather, it is the meanings inscribed in them that are of
importance. Bernstein (1993) cites how such „symbolic „tools‟ are never neutral;
intrinsic to their construction are social classifications, stratifications,
distributions and modes of re-contextualising‟ (p.xvii).
As participants interact with those in their (situated) environment, they construct
joint meanings within a given context. In this way, meaning is constructed
symbolically through interaction with others (Greig and Taylor, 1999). Symbolic
58
and social interactionists acknowledge that meanings are derived from the
social process of people, or groups of people, interacting (Berg, 2007).
According to Patton (2002), the three widely cited basic interactionist
assumptions are:
1. human beings act toward things on the basis of the meanings that the things have for them;
2. the meaning of things arises out of the social interaction one has with one‟s fellows;
3. the meanings of things are handled in and modified through an interpretative process used by the person in dealing with the things he or she encounters.
Blumer (1969) cited in Patton (2002, p.112).
Blumer suggested that meanings derive from the social processes of
interaction, allowing people to produce various realities that constitute their
perceptions of truth (Patton, 2002). As these realities are related to how people
create meanings, „reality becomes an interpretation of various definitional
options‟ (Berg, 2007, p.10). In this present study, this process of definition
occurs through interactions with others and their learned previous experiences,
the subject, and the learning environment.
„This role taking is an interaction. It is symbolic interaction, for it is possible only because of the „significant symbols‟ – that is, language and other symbolic tools – that we humans share and through which we communicate. Only through dialogue can one become aware of the perceptions, feelings and attitudes of others and interpret their meanings and intent.‟
(Crotty, 1998, p.75).
Patton (2002) cites that „only through close contact and direct interaction with
people in open-minded, naturalistic inquiry and inductive analysis could the
symbolic interactionist come to understand the symbolic world of the people
being studied‟ (p.112). It is exactly this open minded and naturalistic approach
that is being proposed through this methodology. The application and
interpretation of these symbols of experience is the cornerstone of this study.
59
Activities, which are understood through the construction of personal meanings
of learned experiences in relation to individuals‟ lives, backgrounds, and
personal values, have been encouraged by social constructivist pedagogical
approaches (Fernandez-Balboa, 1997). The learned nature of this constructive
process, through the sharing and interpreting of educational experiences,
accounts for the creation of meaning being situated in the context in which they
occur. Lave and Wenger‟s (1991) situated learning theory helps the
understanding of these contextual processes, through their discussion of the
situated nature of learning through a „community of practice‟, which involves
„social co-participation‟. They see the situated character of human
understanding and communication as legitimised through an individual‟s relative
engagement in these communities. „A person‟s intentions to learn are engaged,
and the meaning of learning is configured, through the process of becoming a
full participant in a socio-cultural practice‟ (Lave and Wenger, 1991, p.29). As
such, this practice emphasises the inherently socially negotiated character of
meaning (Lave and Wenger, 1996). Their ideas dovetail with the principles of
the inductive and interpretive nature of this research.
Whilst the participants‟ meanings are appreciated as symbolically and situated
concepts of truth, it is the social construction and interpretation of their
experiences on which the analysis in this thesis is framed. Hence, the social
engagements, which exist between the researcher, and the researched,
contribute to the form and content of the analysis that takes place. As such,
researchers engaged in this process must clarify the basic constructs,
terminology, and definitions used to minimise any conceptual confusion of
situated social constructivist research (Trent et al., 1998).
3.3 Through ‘voice’, to interpretation
The conduct of interpretive research is commonly described as being subjective
and interactive. Indeed, a great emphasis is placed upon the importance of
meaning and interpretation within social constructivist interpretive studies.
Social science research is driven as much by the „personal values‟ of the
60
researcher, as it is by the „rigour‟ and „hygiene‟ of its‟ methodology (Clough and
Nutbrown, 2007). In contrast to the notion of an uncontaminated „realist‟ tale of
the researched participants‟ experience (Sparkes, 2002), in assuming the role
of researcher, my interactions with the participants (in their role as the
researched) are integral to the success of the understandings that are made of
their worlds. These interpretations of „voice‟ are seen throughout both the data
collection and its subsequent analysis of this study.
Thus, despite a broad awareness of good practice regarding the methods,
which have been developed as appropriate to the aims of this work, the
uniformity of technical competencies, or a replicable method, is of little
importance to this study. Interventions are not manipulated to engineer and
observe change within participants. Instead, I see my ability to interpret the
unedited lived experiences of participants as the sole determining factor of the
success of this thesis. This importance is guided by the recognition that data,
for example interview responses, are not simply seen as true or false reports on
reality; instead they are treated as „displays of perspectives, which draw upon
available cultural resources‟ (Silverman, 2006, p.144).
„Meanings do not have an independent existence, a reality of their own which is somehow separate from social actors. They are not imposed by an external society that constrains members to act in certain ways. Instead they are constructed and reconstructed by actors in the course of social interaction.‟
(Haralambos and Holborn, 1995, p.815).
As mentioned in the introduction to this thesis, I do not attempt to disaggregate
myself, from the processes, which underpin this research. The reconstructed
meanings applied to the data, through social interaction with it, naturally shape
its form and existence as a unique interpretation. As Sparkes (1994) also
reminds us, the social skills and creative capacities of the researcher are
heavily relied upon within interpretive research. Consequently, the practices in
which I have shared, alongside participants and staff of the schools, help to
shape my interpretations of their experiences.
61
Embracing the interpretive paradigm clearly recognises the role of the
researcher in the social world and the meanings that people attribute to every
day life (Silk et al., 2005, p.11). As Blaikie (1993) observes, the cultural
background of the researcher is part of this evidence, in so far that he/she
places him/herself in the same critical plane as the subject matter. Within this
design, „the human instrument builds upon his or her tacit knowledge, as much
as if not more than upon propositional knowledge‟ (Lincoln and Guba, 1985,
p.187). Layder (2006) alludes to the „unique childhood experiences (as well as
later ones) which constitute a well of attitudes and behavioural dispositions built
up over time‟ (p.145). There are relevant aspects of my own personal
background worthy of mention, which help to explain any biases or ideologies
from which this research emanates (Curtner-Smith, 2002).
3.3.1 Personal Meaning
I was 24 years old during the time I spent working with case study participants;
a six foot tall male, with shaved hair, and stubble. I have had a chequered past
both in school and in PE. Not blessed with natural physical ability, in the past I
had to work for recognition, befitting of a culture which valued performance.
This did not detract from my love of learning through the physical, or my
advocacy for physical education in general. Such a desire for recognition had
an effect upon my behaviours. I was not involved in an alternative educational
provision, nor was I assessed or „diagnosed‟ with any clinical or behavioural
difficulties. However, it is fair to say that my own education was not without its
share of incidents. I have experienced first-hand some of the difficulties, and
many of the tendencies, associated to SEBD, which participants in this study
speak of. Ultimately and thankfully, my schooling was a tale of success.
Notwithstanding this outcome, I do consider that I can empathise with those
whose behaviour is, at times, a challenge to their schooling.
Hence, the issues, which run through this research, have been of interest since
I left compulsory education. As such, the personal motivation to write and
research this topic comes from a deep-rooted and long standing desire to make
62
sense of how, and why, children and young people experience schooling so
very differently. I am guided by my previous experiences of working with
populations of students similar to those involved in this research, whose
turbulent relationships with school can define their experiences in PE, and visa
versa. I am indebted to, and driven by, their honesty and attitude, which is often
seemingly masked by their externalising behaviours.
The meanings, which I attach to the participants‟ experiences and, indeed, the
stories to which I give weight, are a product of my personal values and ideals,
which have developed through the experiences I describe above. Broadly
speaking, I believe in comprehensive education underpinned by standards of
inclusion and acceptance. I believe in education, which is tailored to the needs
of the individual, and which recognises that, for many, accessing the curriculum,
which they are given, is a great challenge. I am interested in the very
changeable and dynamic nature of participants‟ experiences, and the multiple
and complex factors, which contribute to these experiences. I am intrigued by
the multiple realities and multiple interpretations, which result from shared
educational experiences. I believe that the unique and rich ecology of the many
contributory and co-morbid factors, which shape these accounts, should never
be delimited. It is this encompassing approach that I see as the cornerstone of
interpretivist work.
I have a belief in humanism; I believe that we are who we are through other
people, and that human value should shape our relationships with one and
other (Davies, 1996). This involves seeking the best in each other, without
religion or spirituality, centred upon human interests and values. Subsequently,
shared experiences, and the environments in which they take place, shape us
as individuals. I deem learned behaviours to be a product of relationships with
others in our environments.
How I interpret behaviours and experiences is therefore, by virtue, inextricably
inductive and subjective in nature. In this instance, it is such interpretations that
63
guide the application of the methodological principles outlined thus far. Blaikie
(1993) summarises how „objectivity and the search for truth is impossible in the
social sciences; all social research will be contaminated by the values and
interests of the researcher‟ (p.19). It is for this reason that my own personal
experiences provide an added dimension to these interpretations, which it
would be remiss to ignore.
3.4 From Methodology to Methods; Qualitative Principles
An interpretive methodology pays reference to the understanding that the
human sciences should be steeped in contextualised hermeneutics for the
purpose of recognising the meanings and perspectives of the people being
studied.
„Human behaviour cannot be predicted with the precision that is possible in the natural sciences because it varies according to people‟s intentions, objectives, and the historically changing meanings which give them sense and context.‟
(Layder, 2006, p.160).
An inability or lack of desire to predict such variations in meaning requires of
this research an approach, which values the fluidity of the ways in which
participants generate and recount their knowledge of experiences.
„The epistemology that underpins interpretivism also recognises that knowledge is derived from the day to day concepts and meanings. The interpretivist paradigm thus generally leads to the adoption of qualitative research methods that allow the researcher to gain a descriptive understanding of the values, meanings, and actions of the subjects under study.‟
(Pope, 2006 p.22).
It is worth remembering that the social world is already interpreted, before the
social scientist arrives (Blaikie, 1993). The qualitative methods which underpin
an interpretivist framework pay reference to this concept. As alluded to
previously, it remains difficult to offer a definition of qualitative work, which does
64
justice to the broad nature of its potential applications. Denzin and Lincoln
(2005a) attempt such a task;
„Qualitative research is a situated activity that locates the observer in the world. It consists of a set of interpretive, material practices that make the world visible. These practices transform the world. They turn the world into a series of representations…..at this level, qualitative research involves an interpretive, naturalistic approach to the world. This means that qualitative researchers study things in their natural settings, attempting to make sense of, or interpret, phenomena in terms of the meanings people bring to them.‟
(Denzin and Lincoln, 2005a, p.3).
The interest in practices that make the world visible comes through the study of
„how humans arrange themselves and their settings and how inhabitants of
these settings make sense of their surroundings through symbols, rituals, social
structures, social roles, and so forth‟ (Berg, 2007, p.8). The social (and hence,
cultural) underpinning, which defines qualitative studies, is a central tenet of
their use. As such the methods used must reflect this notion, in their application
through a natural environment, which affords the opportunity to answer the
qualitative research aims. O‟Sullivan (2007) reiterates such issues, when
discussing the need for „a logical chain of reasoning, based on the interplay
among investigative techniques, data, and research questions or hypotheses to
reach justifiable conclusions‟ (p.250).
It is, in this regard, that this work is underpinned with (and supported by) a
broad range of qualitative methods, which have in turn guided the structuring of
this thesis. The justification of such approaches is led by the identification of
their suitability over others, predominantly through the particular contexts and
purposes of this study (Clough and Nutbrown, 2007). It is for these reasons
that, in a very real sense, qualitative and interpretivist methods underpin the
desire within this research to develop an understanding of the participants‟
experiences. They help to guide the development of methods, which afford
opportunities to understand the unique relationship that each individual
participant has with physical education.
65
Chapter Four: Methods
The qualitative principles, upon which the preceding chapter ends, are seen
through the methods discussed hereafter. This chapter builds upon the work of
both the literature review and methodology. It frames the critiques of previous
studies within the acknowledged strength of seeing research through an
interpretivist gaze. Where applicable, the ecological weaknesses of previous
studies are acknowledged and the same shortfall avoided in this study, through
the construction and application of methods that have meaning to the fulfilment
of the aims of this research. Furthermore, this chapter takes the key themes
from the methodology and applies them to a case study design. The character
of case study research is discussed in its broadest sense, after which the
application of research design principles to the research aims of this thesis, are
made clear. Methods, sampling and ethics are each discussed within the
context of their maturity through a process of piloting.
Figure 1 - Structure and Process of Methods
This study involved three phases of design, as demonstrated in figure one. A
process of familiarisation was followed by two stages of a cycle that involved
Piloting / Familiarisation Focus groups & observations, two schools See section 4.2 below
Local Sensitisation Six weeks, sample 3 cases, range of methods See section 4.3, Table 1, below
Case Study Methods Further six weeks, weekly interviews + methods See section 4.3, Table 1, below
Summer Term 2007
12 Days
1. Winter Term 2007
12 Weeks
&
2. Summer Term 2008
12 Weeks
66
both local sensitisation, and thorough case study methods. Within each of these
cycles, three case studies were completed consecutively. The detail of each
stage of this design is discussed within the remainder of this chapter. First and
foremost, each phase was considered with regard for the published ethical
guidelines, frameworks, and codes of conducts of BERA (British Educational
Research Association, 2004), the BPS (British Psychological Society, 2006),
and the ESRC (Economic and Social Research Council, 2006).
4.1 Ethics
As this research involved sustained periods of time spent in mainstream
education, a number of ethical issues were worthy of acknowledgement and
attention. As highlighted by McNamee, Olivier and Wainwright (2007), „the
nature of the problem to be investigated is fluid, incompletely determined at the
beginning of the study, and subject to change as the study progresses‟ (p.135).
As such, it is a challenge to foresee and plan for the ethical concerns, which
might have arisen during the time of this research. The exploratory nature of a
case study design, described more fully below, and the emergent nature of
empirical qualitative work in general, required an awareness and consciousness
of the potential „risks‟ associated with many eventualities. In this regard, the
minimisation of various risk factors upon the participant was the sole
determining factor of ethical consideration.
There was no physical risk to any participant in this study. The methods used at
different stages of this research, detailed in this chapter, involved only non-
invasive procedures such as observations, focus groups and interviews. No
interventions were administered. However, the potential risk involved in this
study was of a psychological nature. To overcome these risks, prior to meeting
with the identified participants, I discussed potential associated issues with
suitably qualified persons, who were well placed to appreciate the potential
reactions of each individual participant (British Psychological Society, 2006).
These discussions involved meetings with the schools‟ Special Educational
Needs Co-ordinator (SENCO) and Educational Welfare Officer (EWO), who
67
continued to be involved in the research process throughout. They also advised
on issues relating to this process including that of how best to monitor the
participants thought processes, and the administration of any required stop-
mechanisms.
Dovetailed within this consultation with each school was the completion of full
institutional consent from the appropriate member of senior leadership: usually
the Head Teacher and/or those responsible for child protection policies. After
and during participant sampling procedures (described further below) informal
conversations took place with each participant, discussing the nature of my time
in their school. To further reassure staff, the parents or guardians of this study
were asked to give consent for their child‟s involvement, and, hence, were
informed of the nature of this study. Participating children and young people
were, during our first formal interview together, fully briefed on the scope and
purpose of the research. They were also asked to provide documentary assent,
as full informed consent for participants such as the boys in these case studies
could not be guaranteed. There were a number of factors worthy of
consideration during this process, including the participant‟s age, general
cognitive ability, emotional status and knowledge (Lindsay, 2000). Assent
documentation was written in a way which appreciates these factors, and was
mindful of the potential difficulties faced by the participants in accessing written
information. There is a well recognised correlation between SEBD and both
literacy and speech, communication and language difficulties (see, for example,
Prizant, Audet, Burke, Hummel, Maher and Theodore (1990), Gallagher (1999),
Lindsay and Dockrell (2000) and Heneker (2005)), which has the potential to
heighten the importance of these factors yet further.
A process of discussions above and beyond the relatively isolated written
documentation aided the management of any difficulties, which the participants
might have had with the formalities of this process. As such, sufficient time was
allowed for the documentation to be read with the participants. This often
involved the form being read to them, at their request, an event which took
68
place both prior to, and during, our first formal encounter (be it a focus group, or
interview). Informal discussions to check their understanding of the process
took place thereafter during times outside of structured interview sessions. Such
practices remained within BERA (2004) ethical guidelines by ensuring that all
participants in this research understood the process in which they were to be
engaged, at the outset and throughout. This process of assent took the form of
both written and verbal procedures, as part of an ongoing process, that is
sensitive to participants‟ reactions during data collection (McNamee et al.,
2007). Templates used during the course of this process are shown in Appendix
A.
There are a number of both practical and ethical research principles that have
informed the sampling for this study. Those practical in nature are discussed
later in this chapter, however, the ethical sampling considerations, child
protection issues in the main, were of primary concern. The arrangements for
interviews in particular required careful consideration in this regard (Masson,
2000). It remained integral to the trust required in the research that chaperones
did not accompany participants during interview sessions. Despite planning for
research environments that were conducive to best practice in this instance (i.e.
spaces, which allow for accountability to remain) the required absence of the
security given by significant others in the room, compromises the safeguarding
of both participant and researcher. Such issues are exacerbated when
researching the opposite sex. As noted by Amis (2005), the inherent human
inter-action involved with interviewing necessitates that the rights of those
participating in the research are protected. The utmost importance of minimising
risk was a determining factor in the decision to sample only boys for this study.
Again, further information is given below.
The participants, who had varying levels of what is described by their school as
difficulties that were indicative of SEBD, were asked to reflect upon, and
discuss, their experiences in PE. They were encouraged to give voice to their
perceptions and feelings about how their physical education programme affects
69
their time in schools, and the behaviours which they display. By its very nature,
this process invoked emotive memories and feelings. Bringing their behaviours
into conscious thought processes may have also invoked heightened levels of
emotional awareness. The extent to which these types of possible risks may
occur was impossible to quantify or anticipate in full prior to the start of the
project; a point which was magnified due to the longitudinal nature of such
qualitative research (Economic and Social Research Council, 2006). In
anticipation of difficulties in this regard, participants, parents and the schools
were, at the outset, given information on their right of withdrawal from the
processes of this research.
I was explicit in explaining to the participants what the meaning and limits of
confidentiality were (Cohen, Manion and Morrison, 2000) in relation to this
research. The protection given to issues of a confidential nature was tempered
by the need to uphold child protection policies. As Lewis (2002) highlights,
privacy has to be balanced with child protection procedures. France, Bendelow
and Williams (2000) also highlight such issues, and conclude that wider moral
obligations can, in some instances, override responsibilities to absolute
confidentiality and anonymity. The balance between these two responsibilities
was discussed with each school and each participant. In light of such
discussions, the practice was to adopt the local child protection policies of each
school in question.
Related to these issues of confidentiality and child protection, is the discussion
that was to be had with each full case study participant about the line drawn
between trust, and the disclosure of sensitive information to appropriate others.
I was explicit during a discussion with each participant that, once, as a result of
anything they chose to tell me, if I felt they were at risk, our confidentiality would
need to be broken. This risk was both a physical and mental regard. If such
information was presented to me, during conversations with participants, I
discussed with them the need to inform their school‟s child protection
representative where necessary. As well as this spoken context, there were
70
ethically grounded decisions taken as to my reaction to any observations of
dangerous actions and/or behaviours, which do not meet the expectations of
school policies. In mind of the ramifications that such decisions would have had
for my own relationship with the participants, these discussions were held as
part of my own support and guidance through supervision.
The nature of case study methods resulted in disclosure and later collation of
large amounts of personal data. Some of the data was inevitably of a
confidential nature, and contained information pertaining to the personal and
educational history of the child. When in document form, the data were marked
and remained as confidential within individual case study files. Both electronic
and paper copies of documents were stored in a secure manner and were not
available in the public domain. This assurance was given to all parties.
Throughout the duration of all stages of this thesis, both in familiarisation and
case studies, pseudonyms are used for each of the schools, staff, and the
participating children and young people. It is only within the confidential case
study files that, on any documentation provided by their schools, the
participant‟s actual names appear. In this situation, as is described above, these
files have been kept securely with only the principal researcher having access.
Pseudonyms were also used during any resultant publication that originated
from this research. The anonymity of participants was, and will continue to
remain of the utmost importance.
4.2 Piloting through Familiarisation
An important constituent part of the planning for the case study schools involved
a period of familiarisation, which took place in two secondary schools, different
from those being used as sites for case study participants. The outcomes from
this period of piloting were used to inform the case study methods, which were
to guide the time spent in the schools that would house case study participants.
The initial and conscious purposes of this time of familiarisation were three-fold.
71
First by spending time embedded in schools, the intention was to become
conversant with the idiosyncrasies, which could be expected to be evident
within future school experiences. Through developing familiarity with the
particular conventions evident in departments of physical education, the goal
was to attempt to grasp an understanding of the nuances, the language, and
the interpersonal intricacies likely to be encountered during future case studies.
Secondly, it was envisaged that this time would allow opportunities to work with,
and pilot, a range of methods, which might potentially be used during full case
studies. Thirdly, the content of the discussions in the focus groups themselves
would provide insights into how children experience PE. This would inform a set
of core questions that support the interview process of full case studies.
The period of familiarisation in this study is regarded as more than just a linear
pilot of the efficacy of a method. A dedicated period of familiarisation such as
this has been widely recognised by a number of authors. Although the term is
used differently elsewhere in this thesis, Groves (2001) coined this period as
„sensitisation‟. She spent time viewing and absorbing the whole environment as
experienced by the children, and watching for cues of significant phenomena
affecting experience. Such time was an important period of this research,
dedicated to the exploration of habits and the intricacies of languages and
meaning in this specific research domain. Time spent in the two pilot schools in
this research enabled an objective exploration of engagement with students, as
well as full participation in class practical activities and an opportunity to talk
informally to staff and students. During this time, it was hoped that a conscious
effort to learn contemporary vernacular would improve future relations when
spending extended periods of time with participants of this age.
For the purposes of familiarisation, twelve full school days were spent in two
schools. These were spread over a period of five weeks in the summer of 2007.
Time spent in schools was in the first instance dedicated to participation in PE
lessons, irrespective of class or lesson content, talking to children about their
activities and their thoughts on them. Lessons across the whole PE curriculum
72
were visited during this time, to include all age groups and a range of activities.
More detailed discussions with the staff regarding the planning and sampling for
focus groups of key stage three students soon followed. For a number of
reasons, focus groups were chosen as the appropriate research practice
medium in familiarisation schools.
Through interpretive inquiry, focus groups have in the past allowed researchers
to explore the nature and effects of ongoing social discourse in ways that are
not possible through individual interviews or observations (Kamberelis and
Dimitriadis, 2005). They provide an opportune environment to allow for
participants to give their views in their own ways and in their own words (Puchta
and Potter, 2004). Bloor, Frankland, Thomas and Robson (2001) discuss how
focus groups are often used in this way, in the early days of a study for
exploratory purposes, to inform the development of the later stages of research.
The reliance placed upon interactions between participants is done with the
expectation that it will aid in the development of a collective understanding of
physical education. Indeed it is from the verbal interactions within the group that
the data emerge (Cohen et al., 2000). Focus groups used during this stage of
the research were used to facilitate the identification of dominant discourses
and the development of inter-actional dynamics.
In both instances, the sampling processes for participation in focus groups were
purposive in consultation with staff in each school who were briefed as to the
aims of the study. During this familiarisation phase of study, in contrast to the
sampling of full case studies (described in section 4.4.3 to follow), the
demographic characteristics of participants were balanced according to gender,
ability, and additional educational needs. To simplify the process in this regard,
the ethical paperwork given to parents, guardians and participants at this
preliminary stage did not cite SEBD as a required descriptor. The familiarisation
with the processes needed to successfully complete a case study was of
greater interest than the biographies of individual participants. Despite this
focus, a significant proportion of students highlighted by their school to be
73
included in this stage did, at my request, be identified as having some form of
SEN, in the opinion of their respective schools. Despite this not being a pre-
requisite for familiarisation focus group sessions, it allowed for consideration to
be given as to the suitability of methods for this population of young people.
In the second of the piloting school sites, disposable cameras were utilised as a
research method to support the processes of discussion. By adopting such a
tool, it is possible to generate research conversations in a way that can enrich
the more traditional of empirical research processes (Dean, 2007). Rather than
being a source of analysis, the products, which each participant generated,
were used only as a facilitative discussion tool during focus groups. Further
discussion of this concept is provided in the case study methods‟ section to
follow.
Consent was collected from both the school and the parents/guardians of all
participants involved in the focus groups. Participants themselves gave assent
on arrival after having read the research information sheet (which was given to
all parties). All pro-forma are represented in Appendix A. Focus groups were
recorded using two Olympus WS-300M digital voice recorders. These
recordings were then transcribed verbatim with the use of pseudonyms for all
participants.
4.2.1 Familiarisation School One – Waterford High School
The first school visited was Waterford High School, a co-educational
comprehensive community school with specialist status for business and
enterprise. It is a school with
„a lower than average proportion of students entitled to free school meals. It has a small number of students from minority ethnic heritage backgrounds. Very few students have English as an additional language. The total proportion of students with learning difficulties or disabilities is lower than average, with an average proportion who have statements of special educational need.‟
(Office for Standards in Education, 2007)
74
4.2.2 Familiarisation School Two – Edgewood High School
Edgewood High School was a voluntary aided secondary school, serving an
area of greater than average social deprivation. The proportion of Edgewood
pupils with learning difficulties and/or disabilities is broadly in line with national
averages (Office for Standards in Education, 2008).
4.2.3 Issues faced during (and lessons learnt from) familiarisation period
A notable issue arising during time spent in both of these schools was the
dichotomy between an ability to discuss matters of importance with teachers,
whilst also empathising with the participants who were, at times, struggling to
verbalise their thoughts. Through the crossing of a doorway from changing
room to PE office, I often found myself having to oscillate between language,
which „granted‟ me some access to the professional domain, and a colloquial
language deemed appropriate when in conversation with participants. These
issues have resonance with the discussion of the importance language and
symbolism that has been previously given in chapter three. In this instance, the
language with which I was able to communicate was the dominant factor in the
success of inter-actions, both with staff and participating students. By virtue of
this, in making use of language, which each of these distinct cultures seemingly
deemed to be appropriate, it afforded me at least a basic level of access to their
experiences in what was a very short space of time.
Developing a full and accurate narrative through interpretive research is
dependent on the researcher establishing an open and trusting relationship with
the research participants (Macdonald et al., 2002). In such a short period of
time, it was noticeably difficult to build up complete trust with each of the focus
group participants. In this instance, having seen the students for only one
lesson of PE before any discussion on the idea of a focus group, they were not
to know the true intentions of my being there. As a result, the staff in these
schools acted as gatekeepers; they were my source of access to the
participants. This created a scenario whereby being introduced to the
participants by the staff members, with whom the participants would have had
75
their own relationship, may have in some way affected their trust in me and the
honesty of their responses. The issue of „gatekeepers‟ is discussed further in
section 4.4 of this thesis.
In such a short space of time, I became conscious of how best to communicate
with staff and pupils, in terms of both spoken and un-spoken language. I was
mindful of my appearance and dress code, and the associated implications in
the eyes of both participants and staff. I became increasingly aware of the
participants‟ perceptions of my behaviours, and the connotations for my time
with them. I was able to refine my interaction with pupils when discussing their
experiences. I found that I was beginning to understand and interpret the
meanings behind what they were describing to me, in their attempts to
appreciate their own experiences of PE.
Aside to the initial threefold justification for such a time of familiarisation being
spent in school, as previously cited, there were a number of other unexpected
benefits of this period. Each school provided an opportunity for familiarisation
with the intricacies of field work and the responses, which my behaviours were
likely to receive. As such, I gained invaluable first hand objective and empirical
evidence of the suitability of these methods within a physical education
environment.
At this preliminary stage of the study, the use of focus groups served a positive
purpose in their facilitation of the developing understanding of shared
discourses. Nonetheless, there were a number of difficulties in the use of focus
groups when trying to ascertain „voice‟.
„…….The more self assured and articulate students may dominate consultative conversations and be more readily „heard‟ by teachers but it is the silent – or silenced – students who find learning in school uncongenial whom we also want to hear from so that we can understand why some disengage and what would help them get back on track.‟
(Rudduck and Fielding, 2006 p.228).
76
A difficulty such as this manifested within each of the focus groups during the
familiarisation phase of research. On reflection and throughout transcription, it
became evident that there were dominant „voices‟ within these sessions, and
conversely there were relatively silent partners in the relationship. Perhaps this
was a reflection on my ability as a researcher to encourage equality of
participation; however, it may also have been an inherent problem when making
use of focus groups.
For the notion of focus groups to work in this regard, the benefits of group
discussion should not be allowed to restrict the equality of the outcomes. Their
use is in contrast to the desire for an understanding of individual behaviours,
norms and understandings (Bloor et al., 2001). It could be that such an
approach would silence individuals‟ atypical or deviant beliefs, with which they
were not comfortable in divulging to the wider group. The proliferation of socially
desirable responses in this process was of further concern. When striving for
methods, which best convey the interpretivist framework of the research aims,
and within the desire to facilitate the appreciation of the participant‟s voice, such
practice is less than ideal. Equally, the focus groups, which took place, were
relatively time consuming. The practical timing and length of these sessions
was a concern, as there was the need to schedule them within PE curriculum
lesson time. If repeated over a number of weeks, this would be disruptive to the
ethos of education, and would remove the opportunity to experience the content
for discussion on future occasions. The obligations placed upon this research
not to disrupt the educational experiences of participants would not be met if
this were to continue.
An additional method was used within focus groups during my time in the
second of these familiarisation schools. The decision to supplement the process
with the use of a pictorial interpretation through lesson-based photographs was
met with ranging attraction. For some, the process was somewhat contrived. It
appeared that some of the participants were not keen to miss out on a PE
lesson to take photos for someone they had never met and for a study of which
77
they had little understanding. Despite this, their universal application of these
methods during the focus groups themselves was often exemplary. The positive
outcomes of this brief process were worthy of greater efforts and development.
Further discussion and justification of photo-elicitation protocols is given below.
Planning for the time spent in case study schools was refined through the
experiences in these familiarisation schools and the focus groups, which took
place within them. Many lessons were learned, both in terms of processes and
outcomes, which have resonance for the time being spent in forthcoming case
study schools. Some of the method-based difficulties experienced by
participants seemed to be symptomatic of both a lack of understanding in the
task itself, and a lack of trust towards me as an outsider. As discussed by
Holdaway (2000), „qualitative work cannot dash in and raid peoples‟ minds in
the belief that the rich symbolism of the social world has been captured
adequately‟ (p.165). It is my belief that to avoid situations some of the difficulties
faced during these pilots, and to further embed the notion of trust in the study, a
much greater time spent in school was critical to the success of the full case
studies. Appraisal of the appropriateness of each of the methods used within
these familiarisation schools, and the quality of the data herewith, has informed
those to be used in these case studies.
4.3 Research Design and Methods
When developing a research design, and the methods that populate the chosen
design, there is the need to ensure an approach that is appropriate and suitable
to the research question in hand (Gratton and Jones, 2004). Consequently, it is
worth re-iterating the aims and, hence, the boundaries of this research as were
highlighted in the introduction to this thesis. It was not an aim of this research to
corroborate the experiences of many in search of a rigorous, testable truth that
can be generalised. Instead, its purpose was to afford a level of receptiveness
to the individual story in hand. For this study, it was important that the design
would allow for methods that permit the suspension of belief in the givenness of
a phenomena, and allow for the frailty of the social world to be appropriately
78
understood (Holdaway, 2000). Other scientific and experimental research
designs, such as randomised controlled trials or test-retest interventions, were
soon discounted during the development of this study. Many of these have been
critiqued through the discussion of previous studies in chapter two. These were
each discounted in regard to their insignificance to the fundamental aims of this
research.
A research design of a case study nature was, however, well suited to these
aims. Case study designs frequently follow the interpretive tradition, allowing
situations to be seen through the eyes of participants (Cohen et al., 2000).
Stake (1995) argued extensively about this design as being one which is born
out of interest in particular cases for both their uniqueness and commonality.
Such a research design allows for the appreciation of the fact that each of the
six cases remains an individual in his/her own right and worthy of recognition as
such. This notion of individuality is afforded by the intrinsic approach to case
study design, whereby importance is placed upon what is perceived to be the
case‟s own issues, contexts, and interpretations within its own world (Stake,
2005). It is worth noting here the important distinction between what is being
studied as a case, and the methods by which this is achieved. By whatever
methods, first and foremost the choice is made to study the case (Stake, 2005).
The participants of this study were consequently each treated as a case.
Case studies concentrate on experiential knowledge of the case itself, and, as
such, pay close attention to the influence of its social, political, and other
contexts (Stake, 2005). This small number of participants could also allow for
opportunities to some extent, and in some respects, to compare cases in a
number of ways. Such comparisons can only be made in recognition of the
inductive and situational nature of the social construction of theory, as
discussed previously.
79
„…the characteristics of the (case study) method are usually more suited to expansionist than reductionist pursuits…the case study proliferates rather than narrows. One is left with more to pay attention to rather than less. The case study attends to the idiosyncratic more than to the pervasive.‟
(Stake, 1978, p.7)
As the work of Stake (2005) highlighted, there are only narrow grounds for strict
and formal comparison of cases within this design. When comparisons are
attempted upon only one or a few attributes, he points to the loss of some case
knowledge, which does not naturally lend itself to judgement. Layder (2006)
describes how generalisations regarding particular case experiences will always
be limited by the nature of each participating individual; his/her particular time,
place and circumstance. It is the importance of this context that foregoes the
desire for a replicable and testable experimental-based theory, which could
transcend all cases. The relatively independent properties of individuals are
feasibly discussed in such a way, as long as they are understood to have an
organic connection with social processes (Layder, 2006). Hence, evidence of
commonalities in each case is discussed with caution. Any potential
supplementary discussions of thematic issues or relationships that may emerge
are limited to those that are common to each or a number of participants in this
study. The discussion of congruence between factors, which are experienced
by all, are secondary to the importance of the individual case in hand.
Schostak (2002) refers to „the case‟ as a label of convenience for a „complex‟;
as a multi-layered symbolic network that need not display any internal unity or
consistency. It is this which makes comparison such a challenge. In keeping
with interpretive and naturalistic applications of the research aims, the principle
guiding the methods employed in this design was that they were to act only as a
framework. The use and regularity of a range of methods within this design was
largely allied to the relative receptiveness of each individual participant. The
importance of the case in hand simply required an adaptive approach to the
evolving demands of each individual situation. Indeed, it is the flexibility of a
case study such as this, which often contributes to its attractiveness as a
80
research design (Burton, 2000). Participants‟ affinity towards a range of
methods would guide the regularity and consistency of their use. As Stake
(2005) acknowledges, the more that the object of study can be thought through
as a specific, unique, bounded system, the greater the usefulness of the
epistemological rationales behind the notion of case studies can be realised.
Data collection procedures in case studies are frequently not routinised (sic.)
(Burton, 2000). The use and frequency of a range of methods are highly
dependent upon an individualised approach, whereby the cited practices, and
behaviours during lessons, are a consequence of both the situation and the
individual in question. Maintaining an appropriate focus is dependent upon the
monitoring and subsequent emerging understandings of each case‟s highly
specialised and socially constructed experiences. The practical methods
planned for both school sites were a derivative of those used during the time
spent assessing their application during sensitisation to the field. Lessons
learned regarding the effectiveness of these methods during familiarisation time
in schools guided the regularity of their future use.
As has been highlighted in figure 1, in the planning of this research it was
decided that twelve consecutive weeks per case study school site was a
necessity. In the main, this length of time in each of the two schools was
thought to be conducive to the development of mutual trust and confidence; the
familiarity of which helped in yielding a greater depth of respect and
understanding between participant and researcher. The short time spent in
familiarisation schools demonstrated that a vital element of any interpretive
research is the development of this relationship. It was clear that, in order to
meaningfully find out „why‟ students experience PE in the ways they recount,
both time and trust are required. Such familiarisation allowed time for the initial
expectant responses to emerge and pass during the initial six week
sensitisation period in school. The need for this commitment is, therefore,
directly related to the outcomes of the analysis of their experiences.
81
„We have to observe, perhaps participate in the world of those whom we are researching, to relate the construction and sustaining of meanings through time and across the spatial contexts within which they are discovered. The cardinal rule is to be sensitive to and faithfully describe the commonsensical world of others, which for the social scientist means as minimal an intervention into their life as seems practical and possible.‟
(Holdaway, 2000 p.165).
The dependency here, in this minimal intervention, is upon the researcher-
participant relationship being developed to an extent that provides some
assurance of the context in which their stories are told. Ultimately, there is the
need to accept that the child gives a representation of their truth (Groves and
Laws, 2000, my emphasis). The search for their truths is one that, as has been
learned through familiarisation, can only be achieved through progress in a
number of concurrent and iterative elements that aid in the development of a
relationship with each case.
The first six weeks were treated as a scaled version of pilot study
familiarisation, and were recognised as an integral sensitisation part the
research process. During this stage, a range of documentary sources including
archival student records were accessed with a view to building an
understanding of the school‟s perception of the participant. The relationships
built during such a time can, by making situations more comfortable for the
participants in the long term, yield greater elicitation of valid and reliable
information (Costley, 2000). The first obtrusive methods of data collection did
not come until after six weeks of time in school, when weekly interviews began.
These took place during the final six weeks of the case study, once rapport was
built and trust gained. These interviews were the only methods whose
occurrence was a fixed and recurring element of this process. A summary of the
methods used during case studies, each of which are to be discussed below,
are contained in table 1.
82
Table 1 – Summary of Case Study Methods
Method Justification and Use
Research Diary A chronological document that details personal reflections of the researcher. These interpretations were used as a source to supplement the discussion of each participant‟s experiences.
Interaction (field) Notes
Post lesson notes provided an unobtrusive record of the interactions with each case study, more explicit and in greater depth than in the research diary. Objective in nature, rather than the personal reflections given through the diary. Culminating in „participant interaction records‟. Recorded as and when interactions took place, first by hand, and later formatted using MS Word.
Interviews
Twenty minute, weekly interviews with each participant, that took place during afternoon periods of school registration. These involved the discussion of their week, supplemented by „interview continuation reports‟. Recorded using digital voice recorder and transcribed verbatim using MS Word 2007. Analysed initially, on a weekly basis, using thematic annotations, and later using the constant comparison method and QSR Nvivo7. This analysis was used to help formulate the discussion of the following week.
Photo elicitation procedures were used with each participant towards the end of their study, over a number of lessons, to inform the discussion of our final interview.
As has been alluded to above, a research diary was kept throughout the
duration of time spent in schools. This diary provided an opportunity to record
personal feelings, intuitions, and interpretations, as the research progressed. It
not only chronologically documented important events as they occurred during
this time, but also afforded the opportunity to record thoughts and reflections,
which were used to give context to, and supplement, the analysis of interview
data. Within this research diary were interpretative entries that emanated
through observation and immersion within each lesson. An indicative portion of
this research diary is shown in Appendix B.
The observations relating to each participant‟s PE lessons were made primarily
with the aim of informing the content of forthcoming interview discussions. They
were not taken in an intrusive or obvious manner, in that there was not the need
for a strict coding of replicable fixed behaviours, akin to a positivist (intervention
83
based) cause and effect discussion. The intrusive nature of such an approach
could have potentially compromised both the dynamics of the lesson, and the
relationship of trust between the teaching group and the researcher.
Derived from this diary, more formal and explicit records of interaction, with
each of the participants, were recorded on an individual basis within a
„participant inter-action record‟ that, in a way, recorded the „field notes‟ of our
time together. An example of such a record is shown in Appendix C. This
developed into a record of the inter-actions with each participant, and provided
a foundation for the content of weekly interviews. Notations on lesson content
were again recorded out of the view of participants and their peers. Where
applicable, these entries further supported the content of interview
transcriptions from previous interviews, and formed the basis of chronological
records of inter-actions with each case. These records of our inter-actions were
an explicit and useful source of information when working with three participants
consecutively, each with much going on in their lives as they negotiated their
own way through their time in school. On a weekly basis, „interview continuation
reports‟ were subsequently completed (see Appendix D), that combined these
records with the knowledge gained during the interview of the previous week.
The aim of this cyclical process was to both maintain coherence between
interviews, and ensure that the content of our discussions was grounded in the
participants‟ experiences of the previous week.
It was planned that these interviews would last for twenty minutes. This was a
practical measure, in that it fitted in with most school timetables, for example
during a period of registration. It was also a lesson learned from the period of
familiarisation, and was expected to be proportionate to the attention span of
the participants. Factors of significance to be discussed within these sessions
remained partly in the control of the participants as, subsequently, if this was
not the case, „voice‟ would be limited to opinion on specific issues pinpointed by
the researcher rather than the child (Groves and Laws, 2003). Implicit in these
methods was the opportunity for these participants to guide discussions through
84
a reflective analysis of their experiences in PE on both a micro (weekly) and a
macro (autobiographic) level. Participants were encouraged to lead the
discussions around these lessons and the incidents within. To supplement
these conversations, questions were also generated both upon the work of
previous literature, and my own curriculum time observations of their
experiences. Observation and discussion will be „re-directed‟ to refine and
substantiate experience based meanings (Stake, 1995). As such, discussions
were (for the most part) informed by observation, but were also supplemented
by a core set of questions used to support any potential gaps in the discussion
(see Appendix E), all of which are grounded in either previous research or the
familiarisation period outcomes previously highlighted.
Lewis (2002) observes how, with children and young people experiencing
difficulties in learning, an increasingly wide range of techniques are being
developed to access children‟s views, particularly within the context of fostering
inclusion in the research process. Bagnoli (2009) has exemplified this
development in her discussion of the use of methods such as self portraits,
relational maps, and timelines, in supplementing more traditional interview
methods. As such, an important part of the twelve week process during case
studies, alongside the continuing observations, was the participants‟
involvement in photo elicitation protocols during the latter stages of the case
study. This method has been used previously, including during the
familiarisation period of this research, and has resulted in the assertion that it is
a useful device for communicating that which cannot be made visible (Radley
and Taylor, 2003), and can contribute to the development of inductively derived
constructions (Oliffe and Bottorff, 2007). Azzarito (2009) discusses how pictures
provide a visual record of the socio-cultural world regarding what people do,
how they feel, and the contexts of their performance. Rather than analysing the
content of these photos, they were used as a pictorial mediating artefact used to
aid the continued discussion of experiences in PE. A letter sent to schools
detailing this procedure is shown in Appendix F.
85
4.4 Sampling
Case studies are misunderstood if they are drawn into the discourse of
statistical theory, which demands that samples are categorised into
homogenous groups (Schostak, 2002). Instead, cases are most normally
selected on the basis of particular empirical characteristics that they possess
(Amis, 2005); in this instance, both in terms of the site of a case, the school,
and the individual participant cases themselves.
The selection of case study school sites was, in the main, a pragmatic result of
convenience. The geographical locality of the schools was an important factor in
their inclusion, in that the twelve week duration of each case was dedicated to
the demanding processes of immersion in school. Participating schools were
located in two neighbouring Counties of England. Two schools were deliberately
chosen as two that served differing communities. They were distinct in their
size, proportionate to the communities in which they were located. The schools
were chosen with the intention that their geographic location would be
representative of a number of varying characteristics.
4.4.1School Context – Berkley High School
Berkley High School is a co-educational state maintained comprehensive high
school located in a developed urban residential area in a small town in the West
Midlands of England. According to their latest Office for Standards in Education
(Ofsted) Report, the school is served by a favourable socio-economic profile,
which is reflected in below average number of pupils entitled to free school
meals (Office for Standards in Education, 2006b). At the time of my being there,
this large school had just fewer than one thousand students on roll, few of
whom were identified as being from a minority ethnic background. The school
identified that, in comparison to other schools in the local area, a relatively high
proportion of students were registered as having a statement of special
educational need.
86
Twelve weeks were spent in school at a time when the PE department was fully
staffed. During this time, I maintained a research diary as per the highlighted
need during familiarisation schools. As previously described, for each of the
participants, I completed an individual chronological inter-action sheet to be
used to feed into the interview process.
4.4.2 School Context – Brownhill Comprehensive
Brownhill comprehensive is a co-educational state maintained comprehensive
school serving the community of a small market town and its neighbouring
villages in the West Midlands of England. Their most recent Ofsted Report
highlighted that, in the main, pupils identified themselves as being from a White
British background. The school is situated in a rural location, with a smaller than
average population of approximately three hundred pupils on roll. The PE
department was proportionately smaller than that in many other schools and, in
turn, the class sizes are often much smaller than expected, with just 10-15 boys
in each PE group. They are often taught by the same teacher throughout their
time in PE.
The school was without a SENCO at the time because he/she had left during
the term previous to my involvement. Issues pertaining to the legacy left behind,
and the vacuums within pupils‟ records, caused some difficulties. With almost
half of all students being on roll being named on the SEN register of the school,
the number with additional needs is higher than the national average. These are
mainly in terms of either difficulties with speech and language, or social,
emotional and behavioural difficulties (Office for Standards in Education,
2006b).
During my time in Brownhill Comprehensive, I maintained a research diary as
with the first participating school. As previously described, for each of the
participants, I completed an individual chronological interaction sheet to be used
to feed into the interview process.
87
4.4.3 Participants
As Nesbitt (2000) highlights, whilst not employing the term „reliability‟ precisely
as it is used in quantitative contexts, the sampling of participants in qualitative
work can, and should, remain transparent. Intrinsic casework regularly begins
with cases already identified (Stake, 2005). This was not the case within this
design. The selection of pupils from KS3 within each school emanated from
discussions with the school, their SENCO, EWO, or equivalent; and any other
relevant parties. During the early stages of the time spent in each school, staff
who filled roles such as these acted as both advisors to the study, and
gatekeepers to the accessing of participants.
„The enclosed nature of children‟s lives in families, in schools and in institutions means that they are surrounded by adults who can take on the role of „gatekeepers‟, controlling researchers‟ access and children and young people‟s opportunities to express their views.‟
(Masson, 2000, p.36)
„Gatekeepers‟ were the sole source of access that facilitated my integration into
their school. After the initial adaptation into the processes of each class, the
only subsequent role of staff was to provide information on the appropriateness
of each potential participant, and help in the selection of those deemed most
suitable. This was done in a covert way, so as not to affect either theirs or my
own burgeoning relationship with the class. It is worth remembering that the
selection of participants occurred over time, so as to overcome any potential for
staff to censor their recommendations to include only those with whom they had
favourable relationships. „Gatekeepers‟ were not used to manage the process of
consent, nor were they privy to any data. The initial use of staff in this way was
done in full cognition of sampling concepts and processes, adopting a selection
process of individual participants that, through consultation, was broadly
purposive in nature (Berg, 2007). It is in this purposive regard that, in
recognition of the many transitional difficulties children and young people face
when moving into KS3 (Ashton, 2008), and specifically the effect of those
issues as seen in PE (Warburton and Spray, 2008; Dismore, 2008; Dismore
88
and Bailey, 2010), a decision was made that pupils in year seven would not be
sampled.
In light of the effect that sampling can have upon the conclusions that a study
can claim to make, Mooney, Epstein, Reid and Nelson (2003) discuss the
imperative need for researchers to describe participant characteristics in a high
level of detail. This need is exacerbated in mind of the multiple definitions of
social, emotional and behavioural difficulties discussed previously in this thesis,
the ambivalence inherent in the concept of SEBD itself (Jones, 2003), and the
heterogeneity in the population of students with significant behavioural
challenges. The participants chosen were, in their broadest sense, and in their
school‟s assumption, „illustrative‟ of the case for children and young people with
social, emotional and behavioural difficulties. Details of the nature of the
difficulties faced by each participant are given in the details of case studies in
chapter five.
It was important, at the outset, to define who is to be included and excluded in
the sampling of case studies (Stake, 2005). The only requirement stipulated for
inclusion in this study was that the pupils had some form of identified special
educational need relating to their behavioural needs. Participants had an
Individual Education Plan (IEP), which heeds their behavioural difficulties, and,
thus, also records them as receiving provision indicative of either „School
Action‟ or „School Action Plus‟, (or be in possession of a „Statement of SEN‟).
This process yielded a heterogeneous cohort of six students, undoubtedly with
mixed abilities and varying affinities towards PE. Three case studies were
studied at a time, during each twelve week visit to two schools, as is shown in
figure 1. Indeed, it was procedure that more than one case was studied
simultaneously; however, despite their overlapping nature, each case remained
as a concentrated enquiry into a single case (Stake, 2005).
The subjective nature of behaviour makes it difficult to make many meaningful
decisions in the inclusion of participants beyond these already cited. Aside to
89
these characteristics, the gender demographics in the sampling for this thesis
were framed by a reflection upon a number of issues. As has been mentioned
briefly in the ethics‟ discussion of this chapter, it was a decision at the outset of
this study to only sample boys. There are epidemiological issues, which are
underpinned by statistics regarding the disparity in SEBD prevalence when
assessed by gender. As Cooper (2006) has highlighted, SEBD affects three
times as many boys as girls.
„Significantly more boys than girls are identified as experiencing (social) emotional and behavioural difficulties, and within the spectrum of SEBD there is convincing evidence that behavioural difficulties are attributed more to boys and emotional (including depressive disorders) to girls.‟
(Maras and Cooper, 1999 p.68).
The skewed and disproportionate nature of the SEBD population, as is
described above, had consequence upon the number of potential boys that
fitted selection criteria, and were available to sample in each school.
Consideration was also given to the importance of an element of empathy in
interpretivist work. This was deemed significant to support the processes
involved in accessing the stories which the children and young people offer. The
success of an attempt to make sense of their time in PE would be defined by
my ability as a researcher to empathise with their experiences. Framed by my
own experiences, the translation of their stories would define the
accomplishments of the resulting process of analysis. These would be limited if
gender were not accounted for in sampling.
The use of school documents within these case studies helped to provide
background information and context to the discussions with these participants.
The documents considered included IEP‟s, Pastoral Support Plans (PSP‟s), and
school progress checks. The use of such information was limited to providing
demographic context to each case study participant. The worth of these
documents is limited by the inconsistencies within both their contexts and
authors. In turn, little weight was given to their content other than in the
90
development and understanding of a case at the outset. Exemplars of
correspondence with schools are shown in Appendix G.
4.5 Analysis
It was not the intention of this study, once having studied a „case‟, to then
generalise these findings. As discussed previously, the first obligation was to
understand each individual case in turn. As this research was grounded in an
interpretive methodology, it was not the aim to generalise behaviour, events, or
actions and thus the findings of one case study were difficult to compare with
the findings of another (Macdonald et al., 2002). The analysis of semantics
within the data, which emanate from each case, was framed by the recognition
that the primary responsibility was to a singular, within case analysis. Any
cross-case thematic analysis, which was viable as a result of comparative
issues of discussion, was secondary to these processes.
The texts of interviews were studied at an early stage, whereby verbatim
transcription was completed on the day when each took place. Informal
thematic annotation began at this stage, with emerging „codes‟ first being
written in the margin of each script. Embryonic themes that became evident
from the time spent transcribing each week were later used to inform any
subsequent and forthcoming observations and interviews. As has previously
been discussed, each weekly interview was, therefore, in a way, grounded in
the lessons learnt from the previous week. The verification of this initial process
of analysis came solely through the continual social validation, which each
participant was able to give. The prolonged period of time spent in school
allowed for opportunities such as this, through the reinforcement of ideas during
each weekly interview that passed. In this way, each participant was
encouraged to offer further clarification and insight into discussions of the
previous week. Their continual expansion of the experiences, which they spoke
about across a number of weeks, afforded opportunities to ensure that my
interpretations of their comments were accountable. This also negated in part
the challenges faced when, as often found with younger children, participants
91
refer to only the most recent past to formulate their perceptions (Groves and
Laws, 2003).
Rather than detailed discourse analysis for the purpose of formal transcript
coding upon completion of case studies, the choice was made to adopt
processes guided by inductive reasoning and analysis protocols. These
mechanisms focussed on discovering patterns, themes and categories in data
that were not pre-determined by experimental hypotheses prior to data
collection (Patton, 2002).
„The qualitative analyst seeks to understand the multiple interrelationships among dimensions that emerge from the data without making prior assumptions or specifying hypotheses about linear or correlative relationships amongst narrowly defined, operationalised (sic.) variables.‟
(Patton, 2002 p.56).
This involved identifying salient, grounded categories of meaning held by the
participants in their particular setting (Marshall and Rossman, 2006). As
Silverman (2006) states, „the world never speaks directly to us, but is always
encoded via recording instruments like field notes and transcripts‟ (p.113). What
we hear and see is mediated by such processes. The decision was taken to
facilitate this process using Nvivo8 qualitative analysis software.
The inductive analysis and coding of interview texts was triangulated through
constant comparison of multiple data sources. Constant comparison combines
the elements of inductive category coding, by simultaneously comparing these
with other events and social incidents that have been observed and coded over
time and location (LeCompte and Preissle, 1993). As well as re-visiting previous
interview transcripts, the auxiliary sources of data such as field notes and notes
on informal discussions with participants helped to expand upon concepts
requiring further interpretation. In „constant comparison‟, data are compared
across a range of situations, times, groups of people, and through a range of
methods (Cohen et al., 2000).
92
The coding of data sources was guided by the content of each discussion,
whereby the categorisation of data was framed by an „open coding‟ approach
similar to that adopted within the stricter processes of grounded theory. The
development of categories and codes was open to the data rather than being
guided by an existing framework. Such an „open‟ approach to coding remained
„analytical‟ in nature through the consideration of the meanings behind each
code in context, by creating categories that expressed new ideas, which
reflected on all the data related to them (Richards, 2005). The codes, which
emerged from the case studies of this research, are shown in the introduction to
the following chapter. The systematic organisation of coding thereafter involved
the development of the „indigenous concepts‟, which have been highlighted by
participants, into „analyst constructed typologies‟ grounded in the data but not
(always) used explicitly by participants (Patton, 2002).
„Still dependent on the skills and sensitivities of the analyst, the constant comparative method is not designed (as methods of quantitative analysis are) to guarantee that two analysts working independently with the same data will achieve the same results; it is designed to allow, with discipline, for some of the vagueness and flexibility that aid the creative generation of theory.‟
(Glaser and Strauss, 1967, p.103).
It is at this time where the voice of participants is supplemented by the
interpretations of the researcher. Interpretation brings meaning and coherence
to themes, patterns, and categories (Marshall and Rossman, 2006), attaching
significance to what was found through imposing order in the offering of
inferences, meanings, and explanation (Patton, 2002). Despite the social
validation of my initial interpretations as discussed previously in this chapter,
there remains an acknowledgement of my place in this analysis; the context
from which the hermeneutics of this process are a product. The core symbolic
inter-action, then, is to capture the essence of this process for interpreting or
attaching meaning to various (linguistic) symbols (Berg, 2007).
93
The strength of the prolonged participant validation of these interpretations has
given this study, from the perspective of participatory voice, its credibility. It was
not deemed necessary or appropriate to include further validation of my
inferences, by a researcher from outside of this study. The authentication of the
suppositions that were made came from my continual and evolving relationship
with each case study participant. The nature of the process from which the data
of this study has emerged, resulted in a situation whereby it would not be
possible for those without a similar depth of understanding of each case, to
make decisions regarding interpretations. The perceptions that I bring to the
data are documented by the lived experiences and social constructions that are
a product of the time spent in each study. It would not be possible to document
and interpret experiences or realities in a similar way, without a prior perception
of each case that is guided by a practical understanding of the specifics of their
context.
It is recognised here that other studies of this kind may approach their
interpretations of these experiences in relation to a theoretical framework. Such
formal theorists represent divergent perspectives on the world, and use a
disciplined approach to inquiry that is rooted in a particular historical context,
and that reflect cultural biases current at the time (LeCompte and Preissle,
1993). Notwithstanding the use of these formal theories of analysis, in situations
whereby they would aid subsequent understanding, it is not the aim of the
discussion in this thesis to fit participants‟ experiences, and my interpretations,
into a highly theorised model. The absence of a pre-emptive strategy to this
interpretation, which would have been grounded in a theoretical bias, was a
conscious decision that allowed for the inductive nature of interpretations to
emerge from the data alone. This process places great faith in the data. During
and after this process, the choice was made not to be influenced by a
conceptual framework or typology. The purpose of „theory‟ in this study, in terms
of its use in understanding participant‟s perceptions, has been fulfilled instead
by the continual revision and validation of each participant, as is previously
described.
94
Through appropriate recognition of previous literature where applicable, the
analysis within this thesis makes sense of participant‟s experiences in relation
to tacit (personal) informal theories, which are grounded in a social and human
construction. In line with the interpretivist ideals mentioned previously, these
constructions are those of the researcher, and the participants, who have given
their voice. It is only when such constructions are not made explicit, that these
personal „lay‟ theories can become a significant source of distortion in research
(LeCompte and Preissle, 1993). The „bias‟ that a theoretical framework would
give to any interpretation, is replaced here by a personal „bias‟. In this case, the
personal bias (constructions and experiences) of the participants are given in
the preceding chapter. The theorising of the interpretation in this chapter is that
of my own bias; that which has emerged over time, is grounded in a highly
subjective process of data collection, and is personal to the understanding of
highly contextualised experiences.
„Truth in the fields of human affairs is better approximated by statements that are rich with the sense of human encounter: to speak not of underlying attributes, objective observables, and universal forces, but of perceptions and understanding that come from immersion in, and holistic regard for, the phenomena.‟
(Stake, 1978, p.6).
The interpretation in chapter six of this thesis is simply the product of my own
perceptions and understandings of phenomena, which have grown through a
combination of the immersion in the educational lives of participants, in addition
to the underlying attributes that the above quotation refers to. These attributes
are more adequately described in the preceding (methodological) chapter.
Once analysed and interpreted in isolation, the case studies were compared
and contrasted in search of themes emerging from the already categorised
data. Cross-case analysis facilitated the search for patterns and themes that
cut across individual experiences and which aggregate thematically (Patton,
2002). The identification and choice of the particular examples, which portrayed
the shared interpretations of each study, are a derivative of those most common
95
throughout the comparison of cases. These salient themes can, therefore, be
deemed as exemplary of a collection of case studies, which shared and
exhibited the recurring matters of significance, which illustrated their PE
experiences. The analysis of data born out of interpretivist and qualitative
methods can, by not seeking frequencies of occurrences, instead, replace
quantity with quality and intensity, which separates the significant few from the
insignificant many instances of behaviour (Cohen et al., 2000, original
emphasis).
The principles of analysis that guide this study share this aim, in search of
significant experiences that were representative of their time in PE. By primarily
adopting within case analyses for each participant, which were grounded in
individuals experiences and that were developed over time, the quality of the
inductive accounts of their PE experiences is further legitimised.
96
Chapter Five: Case Studies
The information presented in this chapter is the result of both naturally occurring
data, which happened through experiential interaction without planning or
manipulation, and the products of interviews allowing for the voice of each
participant. This chapter, therefore, presents and references the raw data from
a number of sources. These sources highlight the sense of triangulation
between the various methods previously addressed. Predominantly, the
individual discussion given within each section is evidenced by continual
reference to (in the main) interview transcripts, which are indications of the
participants‟ experiences, in their own voice. An indicative example of an
interview transcript is shown in Appendix H. Supplementing these interviews are
the field notes of interactions with each individual participant (see for example
Appendix C). The data presented here, from within both interaction records and
interview transcripts, are purely objective in nature.
The inclusion of data from a number of sources reflects the application of social
constructivist principles, as previously discussed in section 3.2. The contextual
information contained within these sources helps in making sense of the
situated „processes of relationship‟ (Gergen, 2001, p.8) that contribute to the
development of participants‟ experiences at a particular time and place. As
such, the contextual relevancy of the data is a derivative of „accounts (which)
are part of the world which they describe‟ (Silverman, 2006, p.129).
Where applicable, a range of sources are used in the discussion chapter to
follow to interrogate the experiences spoken of by participants. The inclusion of
such information in this chapter does not go so far as to debate, interpret, or
offer value judgements, which would question the content of the participants‟
voice. They are instead used as an independent measure to provide an element
of context to the emotive nature of the experiences of each case study
participant. In this sense, they help to inform the forthcoming discussion of any
incomplete or contradictory concerns. The detached and impartial characteristic
97
of these supplementary sources of data help to apply an unbiased
representation of the ways in which participant‟s make sense of their PE
classes, without the need to question their motives or legitimacy.
In the sections to follow, these sources are referenced as per figure 2 below.
Raw data are acknowledged in this way to provide a level of accountability to
this process.
MPR.T.230406.123
Figure 2 - Structure of Source Information
Transcript and interaction sources often dovetail to each other within this
chapter, to provide an overview of the circumstances, and incidents, that
participants refer to when speaking of their behaviours in PE.
In contrast, the substance of personal research diaries that were kept over the
duration of time in schools is acknowledged to a lesser extent in this chapter.
The research diary (see Appendix B) predominantly consisted of personal
considerations of the shared experiences that formed the basis of my time with
each participant. It was deemed appropriate to separate these thoughts and
intuitions from the purity of our associations, and thus more suitable to give an
objective account of these episodes within each interaction record. As a result
of these differences in their use, instead of being offered here amongst the
content of transcripts and interactions, my reflections, intuitions, and
interpretations of these instances that came through the research diary are
inherent within the ensuing discussion and interpretation chapter.
School Code (pseudonym)
Participant initial (pseudonym)
Data Source T – Transcript I – Interaction
Line number (where applicable, from complete transcript supplement)
Date on record (DD/MM/YY)
98
In relation to interview source data, as has been discussed in the preceding
chapter, transcripts were analysed in two ways, at two different times. The
content of interviews was both loosely annotated on a weekly basis, after and
during transcription. As an ongoing concern during the course of each case
study, the continual transcription and annotation of source data allowed for the
development of evolving topics of discussion, which emerged over a number of
weeks (see for example Appendix D). These topics augmented the core
thematic interview questions which were solely used when first meeting with
each case study (Appendix E). This practice allowed for areas of uncertainty to
be taken up, and further discussed in relation to the ongoing points of
communication. As a result of such a process, the data appearing in this
chapter should not be read as a single conversation. The examples given in
each case study do not exist in isolation. Rather, they are often the culmination
of a process of discussions that were informed by a range of experiences. The
immediacy of interpretation and analysis was helped, in part, by the weekly
opportunities to discuss points made both during interviews and through
classroom observations. Citations of transcripts that are given in this chapter,
and the implications discussed as a result of these extracts, should, as such,
not be deemed as being exclusive to only the particular reference being given.
Where data appears to show participants purely confirming a viewpoint
subsequent to a prompt from myself, the questions posed will have evolved as
a consequence of prior instances of discussion.
In addition to the evolutionary process of discussion and interpretation of each
case study, upon the conclusion of data collection, transcripts were then
analysed to a greater extent according to the principles of „open coding‟. Table
2 shows the range of codes that emerged from this procedure, and the
definitions, which they were given.
99
Table 2 - Codes and Definitions
Code Definition applied to coding process
# o
f S
ou
rces
# o
f R
efe
ren
ce
s
1.
Ability
Experiences of performance. Importance placed
upon ability over participation
26 71
2.
Choice
Importance of choice, within curriculum time and
in terms of behaviour
7 12
3.
Curriculum and
Lesson Content
Examples of lesson content and curriculum
choice which participants discuss
22 47
4.
Enjoyment
Examples of participants citing enjoyment within
PE
23 51
5.
Environment
Content which cites the learning environment as
being an issue
19 29
6.
Facilities
Comments pertaining to the facilities and how
these effect learning/behaviour/experiences
2 6
7.
Health
Their experiences of health related
comments/outcomes from participation in PE
4 4
8.
Learning
What the participants perceive as learning in PE.
What they think they learn, examples.
Importance of.
13 26
9.
Peers
Relative importance of peers. How this affects
their relationship with PE and experiences within
it
19 39
10.
Behaviour
Contains all examples of participants discussing
their behaviour, in particular its relationship to
PE
8 14
10a.
Antecedents
The antecedents which the participants cite as
being a cause of their behaviour
14 27
100
10b.
Coping
Mechanisms
How each participant describes coping with the
behaviour. Strategies. Awareness.
5 8
10c.
Misbehaviour
Examples which participants give to highlight
their misbehaviour, both in PE and otherwise
19 45
10d.
Sanctions
Examples given of sanctions used in PE and
elsewhere in terms of their behaviour. The
experiences of these.
12 20
11.
Catharsis
How the participants cite PE as being cathartic in
nature. How they experience this and why. What
elements of PE cause this
22 43
11a.
Aggression
How aggressive behaviours are manifested in
PE
15 23
11b.
Space and
Freedom
The experiences of space in PE. Examples of
participants citing freedom as being an important
corollary of this
10 24
12.
Participation
Examples whereby the participants discuss their
participation in PE lessons, or lack of. To include
the reasons for this and effects of it.
15 34
12a.
Attendance
Examples of participants discussing their
attendance, both in PE and in school
10 15
13.
Pedagogy
Importance of, within both PE and elsewhere.
Discussion of relationship with staff, impact of
this upon other factors
19 50
13a.
Praise
Participants experiences of praise given by
teaching staff
9 12
The „number of sources‟ cited within table 2 is an indication of the extent to
which each „code‟ was apparent within and between the thirty one sources of
data (see table three below). These recognise that some interviews contained
more meaningful information than others, irrespective of their duration, and
were more lightly coded as a result. There were a number of practical issues,
101
which explain these discrepancies. The content of interviews with participants
was dependent upon a number of factors, either pragmatic matters of the
research process, or issues of naturalistic inquiry, with which it would have been
wrong to interfere. For instance, the week that participants had been
experiencing, or even the lesson, which they had just left, had a profound effect
upon the substance of our discussions. In reality there were times when
portions of our interviews together were spent discussing inconsequential
matters that did not relate in any way to the aims of this study. Notwithstanding
the effect that this had on the analysis of each case, in looking at the bigger
picture of my time with the participants, these sessions were invaluable to the
relationships on which the data is built. There were also issues of procedure
which, at times, affected the ensuing analysis of transcripts. For example, in the
first interview with each participant, we rightly spent time speaking at length
about the processes of the study, rather than lesson content or wider school
experiences. As a result of these many issues, the discussion in this chapter
acknowledges some sources more than others, both within the data set of each
participant, and between those of different case studies.
For some case studies, the interview data presented here are effectively a
whole representation of the meaningful content that emerged from our
discussions. This was owing to a number of reasons that were unique to the
nature and fluidity of case study research. Foremost, a lesser amount of time
was spent in interview situations with some participants, in comparison with
others, as is highlighted below in table 3. For some, regardless of the number of
interviews that took place; this lesser amount of content is a reflection of the
nature of participatory voice, and is indicative of the difficulties that they faced in
making sense of their experiences.
For those participants with a greater number of interviews, the extent, selection,
and use of salient data in this chapter has been the product of a number of
processes. As has previously been acknowledged, the informal annotation of
each interview led to the validation of these representations through a continual
102
process of verification, to which the children and young people were the sole
point of focus. Upon completion of each case study, and after „open coding‟ of
the interview transcripts was complete, the extraction of quotations, for inclusion
in this chapter, was a matter given due consideration. As an indication of the
interpretivist ideals adopted throughout this study, this was a process, which
looked to adequately serve the thoughts and feelings of each participant. This
process was completed solely by author of this thesis.
The validation of these coding choices, from someone outside of this study, was
considered at length; and deemed inappropriate in relation to this study. It was
decided that only by having knowledge of each participant, could others have
contributed to these choices. It was thus determined that decisions of how to
represent their thoughts, in a way that fully recognised the many hours of
interaction, were within the capabilities of the author. Due regard for the
participants‟ experiences was suitably met, in good faith, and was supported by
reference to the many corroboratory sources of data.
Regardless of the cause or effect of these varying outcomes, the narrative given
in each section below remains representative of each participant‟s
understanding of PE. For each of the cases, these discussions are
supplemented by triangulation with other sources. Rather than providing an
interpretive summary of this data in this chapter, instead the depth and breadth
of sources provide simply a narrative of my time in PE with these children and
young people. This narrative demonstrates that, over the course of this study,
there have been a varying number of interactions with each participant. Case
studies were permitted to take their course in a natural way and resulted in
inconsistencies between not only the number of interviews, which took place,
but also the number of lessons observed, interactions engaged in, and thus the
number of hours I spent with each. These inconsistencies were not planned or
manufactured, nor was an attempt made to alter this course during the time in
schools. As a result of this slight disparity between cases in the length and
recurrence of interviews, more discursive content is given in relation to some
103
participants than others. The quantitative information in this regard is shown in
table 3, below.
Table 3 - Participant Information
Pa
rtic
ipa
nt
No
.
Ps
eu
do
ny
m, C
od
e
Ag
e
Ye
ar
gro
up
Nu
mb
er
of
less
on
s
ob
se
rve
d (
1h
r ea
ch
)
Nu
mb
er
of
inte
rvie
ws
To
tal
du
rati
on
of
inte
rvie
ws
Tim
e s
pen
t to
geth
er
1 Tom BCT
13 8 21 6 1hr 44min 22hr 44min
2 James BHJ
14 9 20 6 1hr 47min 21hr 47min
3 Ben BHB
14 9 18 5 1hr 29min 21hr 29min
4 Jack BCJ
13 8 21 4 1hr 10min 22hr 10min
5 Daniel BHD
13 8 17 4 1hr 16min 18hr 16min
6 Paul BCP
14 9 20 6 1hr 40min 21hr 40min
Totals
117 31 9hr 10min 128hr 10min
The raw experiences of each participant are presented here on an individual
basis. Therefore, this chapter is separated into six consecutive sections,
recognising the importance of seeing each individual case as such, as per the
discussion given in the methodology of this thesis. In a purely numerical way,
the time spent observing and interviewing participants differed. Subsequently,
the length of the each case study sub-section below, varies according to the
extent of the issues described above.
Each section to follow sits in isolation. Reference is not made here between
sections, to recurring incidents, which each might share. Rather than being
developed consecutively through each subsequent participant who is
104
presented, the themes, which begin to run through each individual section, are
picked up briefly in the summary of this chapter, and predominantly in the
chapter to follow. It is in this subsequent chapter that a discussion of these
themes is aligned with my own interpretations of their experiences.
5.1 Participant A – Tom (BCT)
Tom‟s school record shows that he has experienced a number of behavioural
interventions, through both his current school and his primary school. These
have included external provisions including the involvement of an educational
psychologist, and as such have resulted in a provision assessed by Brownhill as
being at „School Action Plus‟. His school described difficulties, which most often
manifest themselves as inappropriate and disruptive behaviours towards staff
and peers of an aggressive and intimidating nature. His school report shows
that these behaviours have led to considerable disruption to his education. Tom
has, since joining the school, had a series of over twenty days lost through fixed
term exclusions. Tom was described by his school as a very lively character,
who regularly has difficulties concentrating and remaining on task. His teachers
describe the troubles he has in maintaining behaviours in the face of, (in their
interpretation), a great number of distracting influences. Tom and I discussed
such influences, whether internalised or external pressures, through the course
of our time together.
Tom was a big presence in his class. He was a year eight boy who, possibly
because of his size relative to his peers, often appears dominant during inter-
actions with staff and peers (BCT.I.070408). The inter-actions in which Tom and
I shared when we first met were quite eventful. It seemed as though, until he
had had an opportunity to work someone out, you were not to be trusted with
his time or conversation. There were many incidents cited in our inter-actions,
which highlight the difficulties I had in building up a relationship from which we
could communicate (BCT.I.080408). As we did not explicitly speak about this
situation, to postulate reasons for these difficulties would be nothing more than
presumption. It did not seem far wrong, nonetheless, that it could have been a
105
situation driven by a need to test the water, and push the boundaries of a new
adult presence in his class, within sight, of course, of his peers.
Performance ability was a key factor during Tom‟s time in physical education.
His perception of his own and others‟ ability, often defined his attitude,
behaviours, and reaction to lessons in PE (BCT.I.290408). He spoke about how
the nature of ability would be a contributory factor when he made decisions
whether to participate, or not. Tom would not participate in sports that he
perceived himself to have little ability in. He explained how his interpretation of
ability affected his participation in PE lessons. We discussed how he chose not
to take part in sports recreationally, unless he was proficient in them. This was
again underpinned by his competitive nature, which also took effect during his
time in PE. It appeared that Tom would manufacture situations dependent upon
his own ability. When taking part in skill based activities that he struggled with,
he would always stand close to peers of greater ability, to possibly share in their
success and avoid active participation. Conversely, in sports in which he felt
comfortable, he would often choose to pair with someone of lesser ability, with
whom he did not spend time otherwise, so he was able to dominate their inter-
action (BCT.I.220408). He understood how his achievements in PE were a
result of these capabilities in different activities, and he described how his
behaviours would be a function of these relative difficulties.
RM: Yeh, so what is it about the running events? Tom: Because I‟m not as quick as all them lot, some of them are RM: Some of them are quick yeh, but then some of them are pretty slow as well Tom: Yeh I could beat [name] and all that lot, but I just get, I‟m real competitive thought ent it, so if I, I just get really annoyed
[BCT.T.110608.11041]
It seemed that the weight of importance Tom placed upon his competitive
abilities was a consequence of the value he gave to others‟ perceptions of him.
106
When he participated in games in which he believed himself to be gifted, he
would make sure that both peers and staff had the opportunities to see his
capabilities. In skill practices with which he was confident, he would often be
seen to throw last, possibly to ensure that others took note of his abilities
(BCT.I.100608). If there was not the expectation of a high level of performance,
then it would either stop him from taking part at all (BCT.I.150408), or he would
take the opportunity to „play up‟ to this fact, and exaggerate his disruptive
behaviours (BCT.I.010708).
RM: Is there something that kind of, is there like a historical reason why you wont try it, is it just that you don‟t want to look shit in front of your mates kind of thing Tom: Yeh RM: or is it that you‟re not confident in yourself, or? Tom: No, all my mates knew that I wasn‟t going to clear it because I told them before the lesson, so as they aren‟t expecting me to clear it RM: Yeh Tom: And then they just, I don‟t know, we just had a laugh
[BCT.T.250608.12222]
Tom‟s relationships with his friends were ones, which he held in high regard. It
seemed that despite a certain level of over-confidence in their presence, he
placed a great deal of weight upon their judgements of his abilities
(BCT.I.190508). Indeed, he spoke about how, if he was to receive praise from
his teachers, that he would hope that this was done in a way that his peers
would also be party to.
107
RM: So were you like, when you got your praise and stuff how did it make you feel? Tom: Well happy, because I thought to myself that I was playing quite good as well RM: Yeh, and did he do it in a way that kind of like everyone else heard as well Tom: Yeh RM: Because you said last week didn‟t you that if you‟re good at something, you like everyone else to see Tom: He just said it normal, like he normally speaks, “oh that was a real good shot” and stuff like that RM: Yeh Tom: And they both said it at the same time when I hit this one, it was an amazing shot
[BCT.T.180608.11694]
The influence that his friends had upon his time in PE cannot be
underestimated. He had a number of close relationships with boys in his year
group, and seemed to feed off these relationships in a way, which had
ramifications for his behaviour. Both he and his close friend were strong
characters in their small peer group. Their behaviours thus had an impact upon
the behaviours of others in a number of ways (BCT.I.100408).
RM: Because you‟re not badly, you‟re not like badly behaved when you‟re on your own or when you‟re with [name] or when you‟re just having, like if we were just sat in here Tom: I show off when [name] is there, and [name] shows off in front of me, it‟s just like that really
[BCT.T.030608.10491]
Tom spoke about these friends as being influential on his experiences in PE.
His behaviours were a result of the high repute, which he held for specific
members of his class. Interestingly, he described his perceived ability to control
108
these reactions during times when these friends, who he perceived to act as
antecedents of his behaviours, were absent from class.
RM: Are friends like, if you were in a PE class in a group without your friends, how would you be, how would it be different? Tom: Just, well, I wouldn‟t piss about
[BCT.T.020708.12868]
This difference in his behaviours was, indeed, observable in the absence of
significant others (BCT.I.240408). When they were reunited, obstructive
behaviours were again evident, with Tom seemingly metaphorically flexing his
muscles in relation to the dominance, which he had within the group. Because
of his relationships within the group, and the importance, which he placed upon
his peers, he was conscious of how he looked, both in terms of his performance
capabilities, and physically in relation to his dress. We spoke a lot about his
fondness of fashion labels (BCT.I.060508), and his unwillingness to wear the
spare kit when he had forgotten his own (BCT.I.200508). Tom suffered from
physical irritations, which caused him concern and distress. These sensitivities
were exacerbated during periods of warmer weather, and tempered by cooler
climates (either indoors or out). As a result, at times, Tom was allowed to
participate without the regulation kit as was expected of others (BCT.I.130508).
For Tom, being outside for his PE lessons appeared to help this situation, and
was something, about which he spoke as being a great positive of his time in
PE. In contrast, his anticipated reaction to a lesson indoors was insightful to the
difficulties he expected.
RM: What like if today is an indoor lesson because it‟s wet, how does that like change your Tom: I‟d have to open a door, cos I get all hot and sticky and horrible
[BCT.T.030608.10599]
109
Tom spoke about how these difficulties might affect his behaviours in certain
lessons. We discussed how his reaction could develop into a situation in which
he would struggle to cope with the need to control his tendencies to be free of
the restrictions indoors.
RM: And getting hot really bothers you doesn‟t it? Tom: Yeh, so I like being out in a bit of a breeze, but quite hot, then it doesn‟t give me a migraine. Otherwise, when it‟s hot when I‟m sitting down it kills me
[BCT.T.250608.12390]
Is his experience, the environments in which Tom was taught had obvious
ramifications for his behaviour. After speaking about the difficulties caused by
his irritations, we discussed a hypothetical lesson, which was to take place in
the school gym. It was this discussion that demonstrated Tom‟s polemic and
complicated relationship with PE. The difficulties that he previously spoke of
were soon eclipsed by an appreciation that this idea would facilitate a potential
opportunity for mischief, which was not possible in lessons taking place outside.
RM: Do you think that it would have been different if you‟d have done that lesson in the gym? Tom: Yeh, it would have been better in the gym RM: Why do you think that? Tom: Because you can jump off the things when Sir turns his back away yeh
[BCT.T.020708.13017]
Tom conceptualised PE as a lesson, which was very different from any other.
The opportunities, as he saw them, were unlike those in other lessons. Despite
the opportunities to „have a laugh‟ in any lesson, he saw PE as one which,
through the learning environment, could offer far greater potential.
110
RM: What is it that makes PE enjoyable and fun then? Tom: Just like, just because it‟s PE isn‟t it, it‟s outside, for an hour, having a laugh, you know RM: So how is that different to normal lessons? Tom: Because you can‟t go outside RM: Right Tom: You still have a laugh in the other lessons
[BCT.T.250608.12481]
Tom‟s enjoyment of lessons was paramount to his experience and behaviour.
He seemed to approach others during PE either in search of amusement, or
confrontation (BCT.I.200508). Tom described how PE was a subject, which he
observed as being a time and place when such enjoyment was a plausible
outcome.
Tom: It‟s just that, it is a lot, it‟s like, really, I can‟t really explain it, it‟s just really joyful PE is, and I have really fun lessons, it‟s just real good fun, I really like it, and all the boys, all the lads like it, it‟s just real good fun
[BCT.T.250608.12529]
Tom‟s enjoyment of a lesson was tapered by the curriculum and lesson content
of which he was expected to engage in. We spoke about his desire for the
competitive elements of lessons, and how a lack of this might affect the
outcomes of his participation.
111
RM: So like, all the sports that you talked about with like cricket and rugby and like shot putt yesterday, and tennis today, the competitive part of it is like something that you like isn‟t it? Tom: Yeh RM: So what if there were a lesson where there wasn‟t a game at the end, or there wasn‟t a competition kind of thing Tom: I dunno, it wouldn‟t be as good but I would still RM: Would it bother you? Would it kind of put you in a bad mood or anything? Tom: No, no it wouldn‟t bother me, but I prefer doing like competitive stuff
[BCT.T.210508.10092]
Tom‟s competitive nature was something that transcended his experiences of
PE, and was irrespective of either the environment or the lesson content. He
was a stickler for the rules of a game, when they were of a benefit to his team
(BCT.I.220508). He would also manufacture situations where, once he had
assigned himself the responsibility of keeping score, his ability to count
somehow always seemed to work in his favour (BCT.I.030608). Despite our
previous discussions about his competitive nature, Tom was not always
concerned by the absence of such an opportunity within his lessons so long as
it was replaced by something of equal importance. He instead spoke about
other aspects of the lessons from which he could experience enjoyment.
RM: What made it a good lesson? Tom: Just funny, jumping onto crash mats RM: Because you didn‟t think, at the start you didn‟t think that you were going to do it did you Tom: Yeh RM: Because you‟ve said before that the jumping events aren‟t really your thing are they Tom: No they‟re not my thing
[BCT.T.250608.12150]
112
What was evident was a response that highlights Tom‟s expectation of choice in
whether to participate or not. This control of participation was often evident by
the fact that he was often last out of the changing rooms (BCT.I.190508).
Without physically observing Tom in the changing rooms, it would be fair to
assume that, within his peer group, it was his domain. He would not always
participate in PE lessons straight away, often being seen to have the choice as
to whether to engage or not, dependent on the activity in question
(BCT.I.230608). The mask of an injury was often used in this regard.
Tom: Yeh, which I couldn‟t skip, very girly, I had to say I had a bad ankle RM: Was that because, you didn‟t have a bad ankle did you? Tom: No, no, my ankle was fine RM: What was it about the idea of a skipping lesson that made you think “bad ankle” then? Tom: It‟s just skipping, and I‟m rubbish at it
[BCT.T.250608.12258]
His participation in lessons such as this was, again, motivated by his
performance capabilities. His difficulties at the start of each lesson were
dependent on the choice of activity at the time; and his involvement was on his
own terms. Commonly, in situations where at first he chose not to take part,
once the possibility of showmanship was evident, he would give a cameo
performance in full view of his peers (BCT.I.190508). In some lessons, the lure
of enjoyment and peer socialisation meant that his performance concerns were
dwarfed by a desire to have fun (BCT.I.240608).
113
RM: Is it because you‟re in a bad mood on the day, or is it because
Tom: No I‟m never in a bad mood usually, I‟m always in a good mood you can ask all my mates, but, when, I‟m quite stubborn, and if I don‟t want to do it, I will do it, but I won‟t enjoy it as much RM: Was it just something that at the time you didn‟t fancy it sort of thing? Tom: Yeh, if it was like on a day where I wanted to do stuff, then id love to do it, I‟d be straight in there RM: Yeh, but even then, when you were out there and you were watching people having fun Tom: I had to join in a little
[BCT.T.210508.10118]
It was clear from this example that Tom did not perceive his difficulties to be
something that he owned. Instead they were seen as a result of external
pressures. Aside to the socialising benefits of participation that he spoke of,
Tom and I talked about other outcomes of PE, in particular the educational merit
of the subject. His conceptualisation of these benefits was solely in relation to
the learning and development of practical skills. The improvement of these skills
was seen by Tom as the sole educational purpose of PE, further corroborating
the importance he assigned to practical abilities.
RM: And do you think that you actually do learn about them, because as you say you can already throw a ball and you can hold a bat Tom: Yeh RM: So what‟s the point of PE? Tom: There isn‟t really, it just gets you outside doesn‟t it, doing something,
[BCT.T.030608.10900]
Much of what Tom spoke about was performance based. Indeed, we spoke
about his concern for the outcomes of participation, rather than the learning
processes, which were seen as an aside to his experience. The outcomes,
which Tom perceived to develop through PE, included a notion of a cathartic
114
function. The temptations that came as a result of the physicality inherent in the
subject, were sometimes too difficult for Tom to counter.
RM: Is it like temptation is that what gets it, is it like, is there like this thing inside your head that thinks “I‟m going to smack that ball” Tom: Yeh I just get grrr, got to hit it RM: So if someone puts a tennis racquet in your hand, is it like, because I remember you were doing about 150 odd keep up things weren‟t you Tom: Yeh RM: When Mr [name] was trying to teach you kind of thing, is it just like that you can‟t help yourself? Tom: Yeh I can‟t help myself. If something comes into my head then I‟ve got to do it
[BCT.T.030608.10467]
There were other occasions when, throughout his lessons, Tom did not control
his behavioural tendencies (BCT.I.080508). Often related in some way to his or
others‟ performance, his inability to behave appropriately could have been seen
as a conscious action, done in a way so as to ensure that others saw and heard
what was happening (BCT.I.020508). There was an element of helplessness in
any attempt to suppress the temptations within PE. More often, he seemingly
could not help but surrender to the unique properties of the subject that he did
not get from other subjects. This was potentially as a result of his interpretation
that PE had the possibility to induce a hyperactive effect.
115
RM: You know, you‟re outside or you‟re running around, does it like, maybe Tom: Makes me excited RM: Does it? Tom: Oh yeh, makes me hyper not so much excited, but hyper RM: Yeh? Tom: I go real hyper
[BCT.T.110608.11347]
It was clear that the physical nature of the subject would often be a causal
factor in the development of a hyperactive response to PE. The difficulties he
had as a result of this reaction were regularly a cause for concern. Tom spoke
about instances where in fact the removal of a sporting privilege was used as a
sanction to counter the reaction, which participation in PE may well have been
responsible for itself.
RM: Because that‟s happened in the past hasn‟t it, if you‟ve been like struggling with your behaviour in class and stuff, or in your PE lessons, then Mr [name] has banned you before hasn‟t he, or stopped you from being captain or something? Tom: Yeh for rugby RM: Does that Tom: I was captain of the rugby team and he dropped me, for swearing RM: Did he? Tom: I hardly swore though, I just said the F word
[BCT.T.030608.10400]
At times, in the eyes of his teachers, Tom wrongly trivialised his behaviours. He
saw his difficulties as a product of the actions of others, and did not seem to
recognise that his behaviours towards others caused them a great deal of
116
concern (BCT.I.210408). It is also worth acknowledging the potential
consequences that these issues were having upon his education.
Tom: This week is shit, absolutely crap. [Subject], piss take. [subject] crap, [subject] crap, [subject] crap, [subject] crap, I get removed every lesson from [subject] RM: Into isolation? Tom: Yep RM: Is that because you try to get removed? Tom: Yeh. Yesterday, there I got removed. I get removed every fucking lesson.
[BCT.T.180608.11973]
Tom found it a challenge to explain the reasons behind his often erratic and
variable experiences. His difficulties in school seemed to present themselves in
a number of ways that were highly dependent upon the activity, in which he was
being asked to partake. We spoke on occasion about how participation in PE
was quite clearly „on his terms‟. He would engage and remain on task in
lessons, which allowed for demonstrations of his competitive abilities. Lesson
content, which did not allow for such an opportunity, was often met with
disregard and discontent. Despite speaking a lot about his enjoyment of
lessons, Tom did not see much point in PE, other than the development of
physical proficiencies. Participation in lessons that afforded these opportunities
would, in his experience, often make him „hyperactive‟ as a result. He described
the longevity of these effects as being relatively momentary, and they were
tapered and dependent upon the next lesson.
Tom placed a high level of importance on his and others‟ practical abilities in
PE. He saw the subject as an opportunity for him to display competence, which
might well not be so easily recognised in other lessons. Ironically in this regard,
Tom himself often struggled with elements of the finer fundamental skills
required by some sports. Sometimes he would pair himself with a more able
117
participant when not comfortable with his own performance. At other times, he
would make sure that his abilities were greater than those of his partner. When
able to succeed, he would make sure he was seen to do so. He had little
patience for peers who displayed a lesser ability than his, and would direct
tirades at those, whom he deemed as under-performing. In turn, his behaviours
would deteriorate if he deemed himself to be in this category. He acknowledged
his competitive nature and took a lot from the opportunity within lessons to
compete against others. He did not see bettering himself as an issue, liking only
to compare himself against others.
He discussed with me how, if performance expectations of him were low, then
he would often aim to turn the situation into a joke. Tom would play up to his
inabilities by exaggerating them in the hope of masking his concerns. Instead of
attempting to demonstrate task proficiency in these areas of difficulty, he would
often use elements of the tasks in lessons to display physical dominance over
the group. The practical nature of the subject seemed to allow him to cement
his position in the class, and perpetuate his dominance over the group. Often
verging on aggression and violence, his behaviours repeatedly seemed to result
in games played out with his peers in fear of his next outburst. Tom was often
the instigator of disturbances in search of amusement and confrontation. He
described how his behaviours were regularly the result of a perceived helpless
reaction to opportunities where he was presented with the temptations of
opportunities to „push his luck‟. These behaviours most often emanated from a
lack of confidence in difficult fine skills which, through a need for peer validation
of his behaviours, resulted in Tom very regularly disrupting others.
5.2 Participant B – James (BHJ)
James was a year nine student whom Berkley High chose to educate with
additional provision at „School Action Plus‟. Staff at his school spoke of his
difficult home life, with many challenging circumstances and a lack of strong
parental guidance (BHJ.I.110907). His IEP commented that he was a bright
pupil but was poorly motivated and had, in their opinion, social, emotional and
118
behavioural difficulties. It highlighted that James found school difficult and was
in danger of losing interest altogether. His school made use of the Pupil Attitude
to School and Self (PASS) test. His scores on this test confirm other aspects of
his record, recording him as being at high risk of disaffection for the past two
school years. Staff in James‟s school described his academic abilities as being
broadly able. They acknowledged his appreciative response when interest was
shown in him (BHJ.I.161007.). His Report described him as a „kinaesthetic
learner‟ with an „average‟ set of Cognitive Ability Test (CAT) scores when
assessed upon entering school. His most recent school progress check records
his school‟s belief that he can be easily distracted. They go on to acknowledge
that he does show an interest in his ability to learn, and is able to pursue targets
if directed to do so.
The interview process was a challenging one for James to get used to. He very
rarely went to his registration periods, for a number of reasons, each very
personal in nature. He understood that I was obliged to discuss these difficulties
with relevant staff in his school. Consequently, rather than being seen as an
escape clause from his registration responsibilities, the time we had together in
interviews was instead seen by James as an additional commitment
(BHJ.I.081107). With the benefit of time and after discussion about his
difficulties, James seemed to become enthused about the interest shown in
him, and completed six interviews in total.
James and I first met when he was climbing over a school perimeter fence
(BHJ.I.180907). Our inter-action record highlights many such incidents; with
James, nothing was ever half-hearted. When I spoke to others in the school
about my work, everyone seemed to know James. He did everything to an
extreme (BHJ.I.111207). When he did take part in lessons, it was obvious that
he dominated them, whether this was through the attention of staff, or his
exaggerated behaviours.
119
James struggled with maintaining a level of attendance in his PE classes, and
his participation in lessons was generally very sporadic as a result
(BHJ.I.180907). He stood out as the one person in his class who never wore the
regulation PE kit (BHJ.I.161007), with a pair of Timberland boots replacing the
more traditional footwear in PE. It seemed to be a visible manifestation of the
difficulties he faced. His seemingly legitimate reasons for this difference was
often uncared for by staff in his school, and consequently the intermittent nature
of his involvement in classes seemed to greatly affect his experiences of PE.
RM: What about the days that you take part in PE and the days when you don‟t? Because sometimes you do and sometimes you don‟t really? James: Forget my PE kit? RM: Yeh, is that all it is? James: [nods] RM: So if you had your PE kit in your bag, would you um always do PE no matter what? James: No, not no matter what RM: Ok so what sort of things would stop you from doing PE? James: If it was cold RM: The weather then James: [nods]
[BHJ.T.081107.5071]
James‟s participation was something that, if it were any other student, would
have triggered both sanctions and encouragement from staff (BHJ.I.021107).
However, neither were evident, and James appeared to have accepted that the
PE staff were not interested in his attendance in class or otherwise.
120
James: Yeh I know, last year I used to get a detention every time I didn‟t bring my kit RM: Did you? James: So I don‟t know what‟s changed this year. RM: Have you had a detention from PE this year? James: I can‟t remember, not that I know of, not that I can remember anyway, so I dunno
[BHJ.T.221107.5715]
The discrepancy between the way in which James was often treated, and the
ways in which his peers were, became quite noticeable (BHJ.I.131107). There
seemed to be much more lenience in the handling of his low level disruptive
behaviours; it often took a lot for him to get the reaction that he often seemed to
look for. This led to a disparity in how he perceived his lessons. On occasions
when he was taking part in PE lessons, James explained to me his perception
that he got a lot of out participation, mainly through team activities.
RM: Right, so what parts of PE do you actually like? You said you don‟t like the weather, but what bits of PE do you like? James: Football, err, rugby RM: Yeh. So do you like team games then? James: Yeh RM: More than like, if you had to do like badminton or table tennis or something, what do you think of them? James: Pretty boring RM: Yeh, so what is it about team games then? James: I dunno, like working with other players and that
[BHJ.T.081107.4894]
When he did participate in lessons, James concentrated and remained on task
for most of the time spent in game situations. He seemed, at times, transfixed
121
by the ball, so far as he would follow it religiously, and chase every loose ball
(BHJ.I.301107). The reason for James‟s affinity towards team games appeared
to be an example of his acknowledgement of the socialising potential of PE.
However, more often than not, because of his periodic participation in the actual
lesson itself, his attempt to socialise with others was concentrated towards the
mastery of „keep-ups‟ (BHJ.I.081107); something, which he seemed to tune in
to, to a great extent. When he did take a full part in lessons, he was able to
relate this participation to a broader understanding of how he perceives his
experiences in PE. He spoke of PE as something very different to his other
lessons.
RM: Because a lot of the stuff you‟ve said is like we can do what we want, we don‟t have to write, we can mess about a bit, we can talk to our mates and stuff James: Yeh I still see it as a lesson because you‟re still learning something in a way, well you‟re learning stuff either way if it‟s a lesson or not if you‟re playing football or rugby or anything, well I don‟t actually see it as much of a lesson, I just see it as like your own time you just get to play football and that but it is still a lesson you‟re still learning you‟ve still got to like abide by the rules and that
[BHJ.T.301107.6218]
We went on to speak about how he experienced „learning‟ in PE. We discussed
this over a number of weeks, and James gave a number of somewhat
contradictory responses, which were seemingly related to his most recent of
lessons. These contradictions were surprising, given that all of James‟s lessons
were dominated by a games curriculum; something that he was aware of and
frequently annoyed with (BHJ.I.250907). What became clear over time was his
belief that PE was still a time in which he learns, but in a social regard more so
than in an academic way. He again spoke about the importance, as he saw it, of
working with peers in team situations.
122
RM: Yeh, I mean do you like it, do you think you learn something, do you think you learn different things to what you do in a normal PE lesson, or? James: I like it, I do, not that you learn stuff but you just get better, cos I already know about football and that so I‟m not really learning anything, just getting better at it. Well I am learning something in a way, learn to be better with teams and that, being with, working with other people and that, what everyone‟s learning really. But, I dunno, I like it, I prefer football over rugby but, well I prefer playing football but like not just matches, like skills and stuff like that
[BHJ.T.161107.5330]
He went further to talk more explicitly about what being in a team in PE meant
to him. It was in this regard that he showed a greater understanding than
previously.
James: Yeh I reckon PE like helps you to co-operate with other people and just generally just work with other people, it just helps with that
RM: You mentioned something last week about socialisation James: Yeh you get to socialise with people, yeh actually you like, what you get out of, I reckon what I get out of PE is just like a time out sort of thing you get just, you get your own sort of time where you just get to like run around, just play, I dunno I dunno how to put it, just enjoy yourself
[BHJ.T.301107.6229]
The importance of his peers ran through his experiences. It became clear that
James seemed to look for their validation of his behaviours. It was in this regard
that he over emphasised everything that he did. He seemed to struggle to taper
his search for recognition that resulted in behaviours that were exaggerated to
an extreme (BHJ.I.161107). He seemingly looked for his peers‟
acknowledgement and praise in a way which, he might assume, ended in a
form of friendship. James later related these socialising functions to his overall
enjoyment in PE, intimating that its outcomes for him were also highly
dependent on curriculum and lesson content.
123
RM: Do you enjoy PE? Does it depend on different things, whether you like it or not? James: Yeh it depends what we‟re doing
[BHJ.T.081107.4919]
He later clarified his experiences of different sports, and recognised that
socialisation through team games was not the only element of PE from which
he took some comfort.
James: I don‟t mind tennis, tennis is alright, um, I don‟t actually mind gymnastics and that because you get to do stuff like say you‟re jumping over like trampoline things, you get to try things out see if you can do it see if you can‟t, see if you‟ve got to work on it see if you don‟t have to. It‟s not like one of the things that I think “oh yeh I wanna do that I definitely wanna do that” RM: Yeh James: Not like the sort of thing where you really wanna do it but I don‟t mind doing it, not that I full on look forward to it, I look forward to rugby and football and that but, tennis and gym I don‟t mind it
[BHJ.T.061207.6773]
James had sufficient experience and understanding to make comparisons
between his perceptions of subject activities and schemes of work in PE. He
also had a strong ability to make comparisons between PE and other curriculum
subjects, in particular in relation to his learning styles.
124
James: I dunno I just prefer physical work if you get what I mean? RM: Yeh James: Just instead of writing and that, science I‟ve, when I‟m older I want to, I‟ve always said that I want to be a vet but I don‟t particularly, I dunno I‟ve just suddenly changed I just don‟t want to be it, a vet anymore, like I like learning and I like exploring and that, so in PE you get to do physical things you get to run around you get to exercise, it‟s a bit of fun you‟re with your mates, and in say science, I like science as well, you‟re working on things you‟re learning about stuff you‟re learning about other things, like learning how things work RM: Yeh James: That‟s the sort of thing I like doing
[BHJ.T.061207.6720]
During interviews with James, we often spoke about the structure of lessons,
and what appeared to be his perception of the pedagogies within them. For
instance, he had some ideas on how he believed his football lessons should be
structured.
James: I reckon like, you could give a word in if you want, but I reckon he should, Mr [name] should like, a lesson a couple of lessons playing football games and stuff and a couple of lessons just skills. Well the goalkeepers don‟t really get much so I reckon there should be like, I dunno, it would be good if there was a practice for goalies in one way and like people could roll it to them if they wanted to go for shooting, like taking shots and that RM: Yeh James: Like taking shots and that, so it would help them with their actual shooting and help people in goal. Like skills and stuff, you can show people how to control the ball and that, cos [name], [name], not just picking on [name] but he doesn‟t really
[BHJ.T.161107.5346]
Potentially as a result of his own experiences of alienation within the peer
group, his thoughtful responses during our discussions highlighted his desire for
lessons, which involved the equitable participation of all. He also held views on
125
curriculum choice, recalling his previous experiences within lessons that I was
not privileged to have observed.
RM: What about dance, do you ever do dance? James: I‟ve done it before in year 7 or 8 RM: Yeh James: I think I did it year 8 I‟m not sure, that‟s boring I reckon. ……It‟s not one of those things that I click onto not like, I don‟t really, I‟ll do it
[BHJ.T.061207.6821]
James described his perception that his behavioural problems stemmed from
being bored in classroom situations. In turn, he related PE as being a subject
that, dependent upon the activity (as highlighted above), would potentially
alleviate this boredom.
James: PE is just like one of those lessons where its like gets rid of your boredom if you know what I mean RM: Yeh James: If no one is passing the ball, then, or you don‟t take part, you‟re still bored and still muck about and stuff, so
[BHJ.T.161107.5532]
The caveat to such a response was his minimal participation in PE. There were
examples during our time together when, not participating, James seemed
equally as bored as he might have been in a classroom scenario
(BHJ.I.201107). Despite his intermittent participation within lessons, and the
wider difficulties, which he had maintaining a general level of attendance in
school, he explained to me how his physical involvement in the PE lesson was
not always important to him. What he did give importance to was the
126
opportunity to be free from the more traditional tasks of other National
Curriculum subjects.
James: No because you‟re always doing something sort of thing like, you‟re actually enjoying yourself, whereas in a lesson you‟re just bored, completely bored just writing and writing and writing and writing. That‟s another thing, PE you don‟t actually write, so you get an hour off really, an hour off writing, so I prefer PE over any other lessons.
[BHJ.T.221107.5841]
In this case, he mentioned how he believed PE to be very different from other
curriculum subjects. When we discussed what he took from PE, he would often
use examples from his other lessons to explain what it was about PE with which
he felt more comfortable. His ability to make curricular comparisons was
evident.
James: If you‟re doing something instead, because what I don‟t like doing because its really boring, you have to do it but I don‟t like doing it is like just reading out of a book or, I‟m not really into reading or like sat down in front of the teacher, them saying “you‟ve got to do this you‟ve got to do that”, I don‟t mind that because in PE you get to do something.
[BHJ.T.061207.6713]
As a result of his conflicting experiences between PE and other lessons, we
spent time talking about what then it was about PE, which might affect his
learning or his behaviour.
RM: Do you think like if you‟ve got a lesson after PE, like straight after PE, do you think that you behave better in that lesson because you‟ve been out having PE, or do you think? James: Yeh you, it like relaxes you RM: Or do you think you behave worse because you‟re wound up or something James: I‟d be more relaxed in the lesson
[BHJ.T.221107.5846]
127
James showed an understanding of his responses to PE in comparison with
other subjects. Its propensity to be a “relaxing” influence within his turbulent
relationship with school was one, which he described as being independent to
the activity. The true extent of this relaxing effect when, for example,
hyperactively participating in an end of term indoor lesson (BHJ.I.141207),
could well be questioned. Such experiences were later discussed in relation to
his behaviour.
James: Some people like get all, like say [name] he‟s like, he takes it too far if you get what I mean, and he‟ll just be wound up in his next lesson he wont be in a mood, but I just go along with it, you‟ve just had a lesson where you‟ve been able to move around and that just, relaxed yourself, just basically just you just being like sort of tired like, because after you‟ve done like all the running around and that RM: Yeh James: You‟ve worn out a bit and you just relax, relax in your next lesson, I still listen and everything I just, I dunno
[BHJ.T.301107.6232]
His description of PE having the potential to “wind up” his peers shows James‟s
strong understanding of how PE affects others, as well as himself. He did have
occasions when he then struggled to explain or verbalise what it was about the
subject, which causes these reactions.
James: I don‟t actually get hyper, I do every now and then, I dunno what, I dunno, I don‟t, after I‟ve had PE I just sit down and just relax and do my work, but other people will still be hyper and that. I dunno.
[BHJ.T.221107.5887]
He later demonstrated what seemed to be a rational and thoughtful view of his
own reactions to different sports, when participating.
James: I don‟t know why, I don‟t see the point in going mad over a football match, you have a little bit of fun, have a game, go back to your lesson, you‟ve had some time out. I don‟t know, basically that‟s what I think of PE it‟s just like a time out sort of thing
[BHJ.T.061207.6489]
128
The notion of it being a subject where he had a “time out” from other lessons is
complimentary to our previous discussion of its relaxing virtues. He did not think
of PE in the same light as his other lessons. It meant something different to him.
James: It‟s probably my favourite subject, cos you don‟t have to do work RM: Right, so you don‟t see PE as work? James: I see it as an activity
[BHJ.T.081107.4931]
RM: Is there one thing out of everything that you could think that‟s the one reason why PE is good for me, sort of thing, is it being outside, or being with mates, or is it being James: Being able to move around RM: Yeh James: Well, I can‟t really say that because in science you get to move around like but you actually get to go somewhere, you do in any lesson, its just you don‟t, you don‟t interact with the other people unless you‟re doing practical or something like that RM: Yeh James: I dunno, it‟s just, probably the fact that, it‟s like your own time really isn‟t it, just do what you want, play with the ball, do rugby, I dunno I just prefer PE over any other lesson because of the fact that you don‟t have to write or anything
[BHJ.T.301107.6197]
James had a complex and multi-faceted relationship with physical education.
There were a number of key factors, which often combined to define his
reaction to his lessons. For James, these contributory factors each carried their
own importance. He often talked about the opportunities within PE to calm
down, and to have time out from other lessons. This process resulted in
behaviours, which were often extreme in nature. Nothing about James could be
described as half-hearted. His affinity towards PE was depicted through his
enthusiastic behaviours, demonstrable of little knowledge as to where the
boundaries lie.
129
He frequently spoke in positive terms about his time in PE lessons, which he
described as a highlight within his timetable that was irrespective of the lesson
content, programme of study or didactic behaviours. Although he did pay
reference to each of these, the underlying reason for his affinity towards the
subject appeared to stem from his appreciation for an opportunity to avoid
lessons of any other kind. Despite this, such a motivator did not appear
powerful enough to encourage or persuade him to regularly participate in
lessons. His experiences in PE were often framed by the most fundamental of
difficulties with attendance and practical kit. His practical abilities were masked
by exaggerated behaviours, which appeared attestable to an uncontrollable
drive for the attention and acceptance of his peers.
James had many challenges in his life outside of education that inevitably
framed his time within the school day. For instance, he often had difficulty in
remembering our sessions together; registration was not a time when James
was used to being on the school premises. It seemed that he was heavily
influenced by his elder sibling, who could be spoken about as a contributory
factor to his behaviours. The challenging behaviours which he regularly
exhibited, resulted in turbulent relationships with both his teachers and his
peers. Despite these difficulties, it was difficult for him to see PE as anything
more than a positive in an otherwise demanding time. The challenges of
negotiating his time in the subject were far less than those which, it seemed, he
had to contend with elsewhere. He took a lot from PE, for both its socialising
opportunities, and simply for the change of tone and scenery in his day. It was a
subject which, in many ways, was a practical and visible manifestation of the
daily issues he faced. The perceived time out it provided appeared to be a
welcome respite from the wider concerns, which permeated his time in school.
5.3 Participant C – Ben (BHB)
Ben was a year nine pupil who joined Berkley High from another local school
after a managed move at the end of year seven. His school considered him to
be at „School Action Plus‟ on the SEN register, and highlighted, within his
130
school record, a belief that he had ADHD and Tourettes Syndrome. It noted the
medication he takes for these conditions. Ben‟s IEP recorded his teachers‟
perception that he had difficulty keeping quiet during lessons, however, worked
well when paired alongside role models. They further commented that he had
very low self esteem, and carried a strong sense of injustice due to family
difficulties of the past. His „Plan‟ recorded that he cannot cope with perceived
confrontation, and had a tendency to both talk a lot and fiddle with objects on
his desk. The PASS data held by the school considered him not to be at risk of
disaffection; he does not score highly in this regard in comparison with others in
his class. His most recent School Report indicated a belief amongst his
teachers that he lacked motivation, demonstrated little responsibility for
independent learning, and was easily distracted when working within a group.
Upon meeting Ben, his presence in class was not immediately obvious
(BHB.I.180907), and I did not start paying close regard to him for some time into
the sampling process. Indeed, the NQT present in class was unaware who Ben
was. What gradually became clear were the sophisticated ways in which he was
himself able to mask his difficulties. He was eloquent and intelligent about these
difficulties, and about the coping strategies, which he used to counter them.
Having only seen Ben in PE, you would not necessarily know of the extent of
the challenge school was to him. He later spoke to me about the comparable
differences he saw between PE and other subjects; a discussion of which is
forthcoming. Ben was a key member of extra-curricular sports, and his abilities
seemed to endear him to the PE teaching staff (BHB.I.110907). From early on
in my time in school, pastoral staff spoke of Ben‟s love for the subject
(BHB.I.270907), something that was later to be used as a management tool for
his behaviours in other lessons.
As I came to know Ben, he showed himself as someone who had a great
fondness for PE. He had boundless energy. His time in PE seemed to act as a
form of escapism from the difficulties he was facing both in school and at home.
Indeed, PE staff at his school thought that the subject, for Ben, helped him to
131
come to terms with these challenges (BHB.I.180907). Both within lessons, and
outside of them, he seemed to place a great deal of importance on the personal
relationships he had with peers. He would always be last out of the changing
rooms (BHB.I.021007), as they stayed to share in mischievous goings on and
would often follow each other, sheep like, during game play (BHB.I.161007).
When verbalising these experiences, Ben framed his behaviours within his
desire to do PE regardless of anything else going on in his life.
He spoke freely during our interviews, with an awareness of himself, his
behaviours, and their manifestations within PE. He was very much used to
having discussions of this nature with external service providers, which made
for some interesting conversations during our time together. He spoke openly
about his time in PE, often with regard to a comparison between his time in
Berkley High, and the challenging experiences of his previous school.
Ben: When they did try to help me everything just collapsed, „cos they like, you know they tried to cut my lunchtimes down and everything, which really if a kid has been stuck in a lesson and they try to help him by cutting his lunchtime down, it doesn‟t work, because he wants to get out of that lesson and just go and get some fresh air and try and calm down, but to keep him in a, it was like a room no bigger than this
[BHB.T.271107.3374]
He refers here to the root of his problems as being what he perceives to be a
lack of understanding on the part of his previous school. In our early interviews
together, he made reference to his perceived need for space and fresh air to
help control his behavioural tendencies (BHB.I.011107). He spoke about this
with reference to the challenges of his previous school, and later contextualised
this issue within the environment of his PE lessons.
Ben: Yeh its different cos like in math‟s you can‟t just get up and run around, but like in PE you‟re running around and burning energy off, if you know what I mean, its just better
[BHB.T.061107.2440]
132
Ben was able to speak about how the physical freedoms, which are afforded
within a practical subject such as PE, allowed him to controllably manage the
excesses of energy, which he would otherwise have to contain. He also went on
to show a good understanding of how such freedom manifested itself in other
lessons of the National Curriculum.
Ben: Its like drama in a way, like, it‟s like something where you‟re not so restricted, you can talk during PE as long as you‟re running around. Well basically it‟s just a good lesson really I like it
[BHB.T.061107.2450] RM: Whereas PE is, are you saying that PE is kind of like an opportunity to also Ben: Yeh, get back if you know what I mean
[BHB.T.271107.3288]
The benefits Ben associates with PE are not just of a physical nature. They also
relate to the relative freedoms when compared with other lessons. The effects
of his appreciation for these environments were further corroborated when he
spoke about an understanding of how a lack of participation also affected him.
Ben: Oh I like PE, it‟s a shame I couldn‟t do it today because I really wanted to, and, just getting a bit annoyed while they were doing it because I wanted to get in there
[BHB.T.271107.3195]
These frustrations were evident on occasions when his school would actually
use a removal from PE as a sanction for his behaviours in other lessons. The
great hype he gave to participation in PE was evident none more so than when
begging for his removal out of isolation (BHB.I.270907). Ben was able to
describe how the freedom associated with his learning environment resulted in
a cathartic type response in behaviours, which in his perception was not
possible through other restrictive methods of behaviour management, such as
this experience of isolation.
133
Ben: Well I like it, like if you‟ve just been in a rubbish lesson it gives you chance to run it off, you think of something else and just run it off, plus it keeps me, well people, in shape. And like the sports we do in school I like
Ben: Just get to run around, burn some energy off
[BHB.T.061107.2429]
He later went further to contextualise this with an example from a sport, which
he saw as a facilitator to these processes.
Ben: Yeh, it‟s just like, and its one thing I like about PE, especially rugby, if someone has been annoying you, you just, you know you see a chance you know if they‟ve got the ball then just take them out and then you like you get a good feeling. Not because, A. you can say oh “why did you do that” “well you had the ball so I can tackle you”. So it like relieves something out of me if you know what I mean?
[BHB.T.271107.3251]
The material nature of the subject, which allowed him legitimate opportunities
for physical catharsis, seemed to result in a therapeutic response to innate or
situational aggressors. He later spoke about the remedial qualities of physical
activities outside of school, in relation to his anger.
Ben: Getting a boxing bag for Christmas hopefully RM: Yeh Ben: So I can just, if I‟m annoyed I can keep my anger in, but sometimes if I keep it in too long I just go mental
[BHB.T.271107.3239]
The outcomes of these participatory opportunities were inconsistent,
irrespective of the activity area of the National Curriculum. Interestingly, when
working with Ben during lessons, he seemed indifferent about the nature of
physical contact itself. Possibly as a result of his slender build, at times when
redemption was not a desire, he did not appear enthused about contact in
rugby, for example. Rather, he took more to the mastery of tackling through skill
based practices (BHB.I.161007). He seemed to enjoy the tactical approach to
134
games, which he often used as a source of debate with his peers
(BHB.I.111207). The catharsis during game play seemed to come more from
literal and tactical participation, rather than the exertion of any directed physical
energy. Alongside these tendencies within lessons, Ben was able to describe
the varying experiences of how he felt after practical lessons, which of course
ranged in their content.
Ben: Well after athletics I‟m just knackered so I don‟t have any energy to terrorise or do anything afterwards, I just normally flop
[BHB.T.111207.4462]
On a separate occasion, he clarified this response further.
RM: So does it ever wind you up, do you ever like come back from PE and you‟re a bit hyper? Ben: Not generally no, I don‟t get hyper unless I‟ve like had a bit to drink or something like that
[BHB.T.271107.3170]
Ben appeared comfortable verbalising his responses to PE, and was often able
to cite examples, which underpinned the discussions we were having. He also
showed an enlightening depth of understanding to describe his responses to PE
curricula.
RM: But it‟s amazing isn‟t it how like the sport which you‟re playing can Ben: changes the mood like that or RM: Yeh Ben: or your attitude or something
[BHB.T.111207.4447]
When we spent time in interviews comparing these responses he had to PE
with other curriculum lessons, he would often speak about issues relating to the
135
ways in which staff taught him, which he saw as being very different in PE when
compared with other lessons.
Ben: It‟s relaxed, the teachers are more relaxed. If you like get tackled and you swear, then they‟ll just tell you off. But if you did that, if someone annoyed you in a lesson and you turned round and said f**k, then the teacher would get pretty annoyed and would mostly give you a detention. Whereas in PE, they would still be like annoyed with you but they would like, wouldn‟t be so annoyed, they wouldn‟t be so strict on it.
[BHB.T.131107.2937]
He was able to describe to me how these differences in teaching affected his
own learning. In turn, he showed an understanding of how these didactic
behaviours relate to his own learning style.
Ben: Well I like to learn in quite exciting ways, not sitting writing RM: Yeh Ben: I think it‟s called kinaesthetic or something RM: Yeh yeh
[BHB.T.111207.3821]
Ben spoke on a number of separate occasions about how such a perceived
learning style dovetailed with the core principles of PE. His aforementioned
hyperactive nature was served well by the opportunities in PE to learn through
the physical.
Ben: I like to be doing [BHB.T.111207.3829]
Ben: I like to learn how to play
[BHB.T.111207.4064]
The correlation between the pedagogies and learning environments in a subject
such as PE had a number of profound effects upon Ben‟s experiences and
behaviours. There were many examples during my time with Ben when he
136
discussed these experiences in relation to the fluctuating nature of his
relationship with peers (BHB.I.281107 / BHB.I.291107). He and I also discussed
at length during our interviews about his relationships with the PE teaching staff,
and how these went on to affect his behaviours.
Ben: I just, he‟s got one of those attitudes where he goes “alright fine if you‟re not joining in then you can get lost, if you don‟t want to take part I‟ve no time for you” sort of thing
[BHB.T.111207.4015]
Ben often related his perceptions of the teaching staff, and their didactic
behaviours, to his experiences and understanding about how their lessons
affected him. When discussing his reaction to lessons, Ben did not seem able to
delineate between the teachers themselves, and the content which they taught.
We spoke about his desire for a consistency in their didactics, which indeed
was often evident.
Ben: I don‟t like things changing from one to another RM: Do you ever get that from PE teachers, with them trying to do too much? Ben: No not generally no
[BHB.T.131107.2810]
In addition to his recognition of the importance of pedagogy, he contextualised
this alongside other factors, again to include the environment in which he
learned.
RM: So are you saying that the reason you behave differently in PE than in other lessons is all down to the teacher? Ben: Not all down to the teacher, the, not the strictness and the fact that you‟re allowed to run around, whereas if you‟re in the classroom you can‟t really run around cos you‟ll fall over or hurt someone or some health and safety crap, but um, but like, generally with the teacher yes, and just the fact that that you‟re allowed to run around and tackle people
[BHB.T.131107.3026]
137
This further shows the multiplicity of factors within a PE lesson that he attributed
to his behaviours; the majority of which were visible as an undercurrent of low
level but disruptive actions (BHB.I.131107). What he also did, when discussing
the antecedents to his actions, was to give a very personal and thoughtful
understanding of possible more global contexts around them.
Ben: No I didn‟t do it because of the kids I hanged around with. I‟ve had quite a rough, I live in a nice place and my parents are great they‟ve bought me up right, but through my life I‟ve had it quite rough. My, all my three grandparents died within the space of two years which had a knock on effect, and things like that and. My dad used to work away from home for a whole week, I‟d only see him on weekends, and that used to upset me and I didn‟t used to know how to handle it if you know what I mean, so that it always like effected me if you know what I mean
[BHB.T.271107.3391]
He understood that there were innumerable contributory factors which affected
these behaviours.
RM: So its, there‟s a combination then of the people that you‟re with like mates and stuff, or people being idiots in the group, do you think that they affect your time in PE as well as the teacher then? Ben: Well sometimes it‟s certain people, or its certain rooms, or teachers or sometime
[BHB.T.061107.2542]
Ben would often use his time in his old school as an example of the variations in
the behaviours, which he recognised in PE. He related the freedom (which he
has previously spoken about) to the behaviours, which he himself and peers
associate with participation in PE.
Ben: Well the thing is there are some rough kids at [school], and in PE they just used to muck around, so it was like a mucking around lesson. Which I‟ve always seen PE as, well not like oh, “I‟ll go to PE and muck around”, but like you can muck around whilst doing PE, so like that
[BHB.T.061107.2537]
138
Despite the admission of seeing PE as a subject with relative autonomy in
terms of both behaviour and participation, Ben recognised the importance of his
practical performance, and was able to explain the resultant feelings, which a
lack of ability brings.
Ben: Because like my half can‟t play basketball to save their lives, well [name] can and [name] can and all that, they can, but like some of them just don‟t know the rules where [name] is just jumping all over the place and elbowing all over the place and they just, I like to play basketball with people who know how to play basketball
[BHB.T.111207.4411]
We spoke about PE as being either a performance or participatory domain. Ben
offered his belief that he sees much of the subject as being similar to sports,
which he plays outside of curriculum time. The difference, as Ben saw it, was in
the conscious development of skills, which took place during PE lessons.
Ben: Well I like sport better than PE because well generally because, well you go and play football with your mates, as a sport, it like, you‟re not taught not to do it first RM: Yeh Ben: and we just play a game and muck about and everything, whereas in school you have to go through well the basics, the boring stuff really, its not particularly great RM: No Ben: But once we get going I do see it as they same, and once we‟re playing games
[BHB.T.061107.2456]
Ben‟s understanding of PE was brought to reality through the contrasting
biographies of his experiences in other subjects, and in other sports. He was
able to offer a range of descriptions regarding his relationship with PE and the
experiences he has had of the subject. He spoke often about his perception that
it was a time which enabled him to be free from many of the perceived
restrictions, which he otherwise faced. Ben described how the opportunities for
139
a degree of autonomy as a result of participation, comparative to other subjects,
helped him to channel his excess energies and appeased his need for physical
activity. He had an abundance of enthusiasm for PE. He spoke of the effect it
had upon him, as a vehicle to release his energies. Through the opportunities
within PE to “muck about”, Ben perceived that the likelihood of him “terrorising”
during other lessons was reduced. Rather than maintain his hyperactive nature
into the following lessons, he described the effect PE had as leaving him
“knackered”.
Ben‟s affinity towards the physical nature of contact sports underpinned his
beliefs in the subject as being one that allowed for him to behave in ways
impermissible in other subjects. He spoke of PE as a time that included
opportunities for redemption, which in turn helped to pacify his sometimes
turbulent behaviours. Indeed, there seemed to be a number of agendas in PE
for Ben. In sports he enjoyed, and in which he was proficient, the ability to
perform was a most important factor. In others, his ability was irrespective to his
experience; lessons simply served a purpose of freedom from the school
building, and catharsis through the physical.
5.4 Participant D – Jack (BCJ)
Jack was a pupil in year eight of Brownhill Comprehensive who was deemed by
his school to have difficulties, which resulted in him being educated at „School
Action Plus‟ according to their provision. His school record documented him as
having difficulties with his behaviours, which resulted in occasions that his
school described as including inappropriate behaviours. These have, in the
past, apparently caused him a great number of worries. Despite this, he had no
fixed term exclusions during the year in which we spent time together. It was a
shared belief in school that although Jack was easily led by his peers, he would
also have been at the centre of any trouble in class. Jack was a small lad for his
age, and struggled with his weight.
140
In the first few weeks spent with his class, Jack did not immediately come to
attention. Indeed, he was not someone to whom his school advised I pay
attention (BCJ.I.240408). Physical education for Jack seemed, in the first
instance, to be a vehicle for acceptance. Despite a low level of attention seeking
behaviours, it was soon clear that he had a number of social difficulties. For
someone who placed a high regard on his and others‟ performance, it was his
own lack of ability which, at the outset, seemed to alienate him from the group.
He was neither picked for extra-curricular sports he showed an interest in
(BCJ.I.290408), nor was he ever picked first in class.
To skip a little in time, after three weeks of consecutive interviews, eight weeks
into my time in his school, the difficulties he had in maintaining personal
friendships directly affected time together with Jack (BCJ.I.180608). He spoke
to me about the importance he places upon his time in registration. He was
keen not to miss out on time spent with peers with whom he was conscious to
cement his relationship. This, given the previous discussions we had had, and
which are shown below, is an unsurprising reaction. After a short break of a
week, Jack agreed to meet me for one last time, out of interest in the photos,
which he had previously taken. This slightly reduced number of interviews with
Jack has not diluted the richness of his experiences, which we did manage to
discuss.
With regard to the effects of participation in PE, as he saw them, our
discussions often centred on his enjoyment of physical contact, in one form or
another. Jack seemed to tune into the notion of a physical relationship with
either the processes in PE, or his contemporaries. He spoke about his attraction
towards contact sports as being „more fun‟ than other activities.
Jack: More fun to it RM: Right, and what makes it fun? Jack: Like contact, stuff like that, contact with the ball
[BCJ.T.040608.8390]
141
Jack‟s understanding of elements, which he enjoyed in PE, seemed to centre
upon his level of engagement and involvement within the task. He made
comparisons between his participation in a range of lessons, both those which
were taking place at the time of my being with him, and others for which he had
previous experience. As alluded to previously, he used the level of contact with
either an object, or a peer, as a barometer to gauge his affinity towards each of
these activities in turn.
RM: Yeh, do you like contact sports then, is that something that kind of Jack: Well rugby is alright, it‟s better than shot putt though, I prefer football because there is more contact with the ball
[BCJ.T.040608.8401]
Jack measured his participation in games through his perceived level of
engagement during the activity. He was able to decipher between sports in
relation to this engagement, particularly in regard to his contact with the ball.
This led to situations where, as a vocal and relatively dominant member of his
group, he, on occasions, would attempt to manufacture situations to change the
content of their lessons in his favour (BCJ.I.120608). In his eyes, opportunities
within games for active participation were the cornerstone of its relative
benefits. It is, in this regard, that he spoke about a lesson of particular
enjoyment.
RM: So what did you, what was it about yesterday‟s lesson that you like? Jack: Um, we all got opportunities RM: To do what? Jack: To do the jump, and running like across the ladders and all that
[BCJ.T.200508.8019]
Jack deemed the relatively fundamental concept of participation to be
noteworthy. As such it could be contended that similar opportunities have not
always been forthcoming. In citing importance to such a basic constituent part
142
of the subject, it could indeed be a function of his previous struggles with certain
task competencies. Interestingly, as an aside to this participatory concept, the
lesson to which he describes above was one in which he spent much of the
time selling sweets, which were conspicuously hidden about his person
(BCJ.I.190508). Such actions could seemingly be perceived to be seen as
something, which might have endeared him to his peers.
Jack later spoke about acceptance through the vehicle of participation in sports,
in which he was able.
Jack: Yeh RM: What is it about tennis that you like, or what was it about that particular lesson? Jack: It just feels nice when you hit the ball RM: How do you mean? Jack: Like, because there are loads of them strings, when you hit it, it just feels nice
[BCJ.T.040608.8430]
Jack seemed to be drawn towards activities that afforded physical contact.
There were many occasions which demonstrated his need for such contact; be
it through legitimate on task behaviours, or, simply, the opportunity to tamper
with anything that he had to hand (BCJ.I.200508). Specifically, in this instance,
his discussion was testament to his apparent need for the feelings of bodily self
awareness, provided by, in his perception, a sense of proprioception that was
given through his actions in tennis.
This demonstrates another corollary of what this participation meant to him. He
spoke about the importance, as he saw it, of looking good during the execution
of skill. Possibly in regard to his relationships with peers in the group, the notion
143
of an opportunity to demonstrate his abilities was one on which he placed a high
importance.
RM: Like you like to be good at things? Jack: I dunno, it is good to be good at something RM: Do you think that you kind of like, do you enjoy certain sports more because you are good at them, like football, because you‟re a good footballer? Jack: I‟m alright RM: Yeh, so is that maybe why you enjoy it more than some other games? Jack: Yeh probably, like I don‟t always enjoy rugby, because I ain‟t no good at it
[BCJ.T.200508.8112]
Jack and I spoke about how his enjoyment of lessons was often framed by his
comparative abilities in them. He also spoke about how his learning is affected
by these abilities, and how he sees the skill execution in class as a key factor of
this learning.
RM: So, you were saying that you like tennis, but what do you think you learn about in tennis? Jack: Tennis? Well like don‟t smash it, it‟s like, um, technique RM: Yeh Jack: People they think like “yeh smash it over their head and you‟ll get a point”, but it‟s nothing like that you have to like make sure that it can only bounce once, and try and hit it over the net where they‟re not standing kind of thing
[BCJ.T.040608.8516]
The opportunity to demonstrate ability to his peers was important to Jack. In
comparison with his peers, the temptation to simply „remove a layer‟ of the ball
with his strength was not evident. Importantly, when Jack was given the
opportunity to develop skill proficiency, despite his comparative lack of success,
144
he did not always resort to troublesome or nuisance behaviours (BCJ.I.230508).
In contrast, in lessons where, (in his opinion), such opportunities for skill
development were not present, these low level disruptive behaviours were a
relative constant (BCJ.I.100608). When telling me of his experiences, he
understood that task proficiency was more than simply a physical commodity.
We spoke about how these attributes were related to the activities in which he
was taking part. We also briefly discussed his relationship with the aesthetic
elements of the curriculum.
Jack: Mr [name], he was well good
RM: Was he? What did you like about him? Jack: We had the, um, I don‟t know what it was, “uma aka” RM: Oh the Haka? Jack: Yeh RM: From rugby? Jack: Yeh, we was doing that in dance. Dance wasn‟t the best.
[BCJ.T.240608.9700]
Despite this isolated incident, and whether the Haka could strictly be described
as an aesthetic activity, Jack‟s experiences of aesthetic programmes of study
appeared negative in the main. In other aspects of the PE curriculum, Jack
appeared to be able to remain on task in PE, when not distracted by other,
more exciting opportunities (see for example BCJ.I.290408). We talked about
his reaction to these lessons in relation to both his behaviours and experiences.
He discussed the varying effects that each lesson can have upon his
behaviours.
145
RM: So if it‟s a morning lesson, you‟re normally, you find it easier to concentrate do you? Jack: Yeh, because everything cant be bothered or anything RM: Because you‟re not yet awake? Jack: Yeh, PE wakes me up though RM: Does it? Jack: Because you‟re outside doing sports, or you‟re inside doing sports
[BCJ.T.040608.8667]
Jack spoke about his perception that the practical nature of the subject had a
physical effect on him. His responses to PE were dependent upon the activity,
and his participation. In lessons that included legitimate opportunities to exert a
physical presence, Jack‟s penchant for obstructive behaviours appeared tamed
(BCJ.I.120608). As well as this channelled opportunity, he also acknowledged
the affect that the physical learning environment can have upon his opportunity
to „wake up‟. We later spoke about the difficulties he has in concentrating, and
he spoke about the ways in which this manifested itself during PE.
Jack: Sometimes I do, I guess it‟s concentration isn‟t it? I sometimes concentrate loads, and sometimes I don‟t. RM: What do you think that usually depends on? Is there something that you know that, if this is happening, then you‟re not going to be able to concentrate? Jack: Um, recently I‟ve been alright though RM: Do you find that you can normally concentrate in PE? Jack: Yeh, well, in that shot putt I couldn‟t, as you could tell, chasing [name] with a water bottle
[BCJ.T.040608.8607]
Jack‟s behaviours in PE were often framed by his desire for acceptance within
his peer group. He spoke about the influence of his peers upon his behaviours,
and the affect the planned activity can have upon this. He placed a great deal of
146
importance upon relationships with the boys in his year, and would act in ways
that either endeared him to them, or that simply copied their behaviours
(BCJ.I.230608). His responses during our time together often stripped away
these pressures. Where his account began to contradict some of the behaviours
evident in class, was seemingly a result of the strong influences of his peers.
Jack attributed the cause of his disruptive tendencies to boredom. In reality, it
appeared to be much more than this.
The number of issues Jack faced outside of PE, and outside of education in
general, seemed to greatly affect his responses to certain activities in his
lessons. Jack spoke about the many contributory factors, which resulted in his
challenging behaviours in PE and which were demonstrable of the difficulties he
had in school. Despite often being simply playful in nature, and (in the main)
neither violent nor aggressive, his behaviours in PE often expressed a level of
disengagement that was detrimental to his participation in lesson content. When
he was able to exert control over the large number of pre-occupations, which
defined his difficulties, his nuisance behaviours often seemed to be nothing
more than a physical display of the desire for attention. Jack held a belief that
there were many opportunities to misbehave during his PE lessons, and,
seemingly, the chance to draw upon these opportunities was often greeted with
displays of low level nuisance behaviours, which were befitting of the much
stereotyped „class clown‟.
In PE, he demonstrated a liking of the subject, which was tainted by frustrations
of ability in many of the core tasks required of him. Jack understood his
experiences in PE as being complex, but often had great difficulty in verbalising
to me how these complexities present themselves during lessons. He did,
however, understand PE as a subject, which had the potential to „wake him up‟
in the morning, a time when he usually struggled to concentrate. He spoke on a
number of occasions about his liking for the tactile nature of contact with both
peers and equipment, in a way that provided a degree of positive kinaesthetic
147
feedback, which reasserted the beneficial nature of some elements of
participation.
Jack was greatly troubled by his perceived difficulties in certain activities, often
manifested in a level of withdrawal from active participation in games to which
he did not exude proficiency. His apparent lack of aerobic fitness, and
difficulties with some core motor abilities, stopped him from developing these
proficiencies further. He recognised that the restlessness, which ensued as a
consequence of both boredom and performance difficulties, was often the
catalyst for his difficulties in maintaining appropriate behaviours. In turn, his
disruptive behaviours were markedly reduced when taking part in activities such
as football in which he had a perception of aptitude. When coupled with his
great need for acceptance and praise, both from his peers and teaching staff,
his reaction to a lack of performance success was most commonly defined by a
withdrawal from lesson participation, and an increase in unsettling behaviours.
5.5 Participant E – Daniel (BHD)
Daniel was a year eight student at Berkley High. His school had assessed and
recorded him as having social, emotional and behavioural difficulties. As such,
they placed him on their SEN register to be educated at „School Action Plus‟.
He consequently had access to in-class support and received intervention
programmes as necessary. Prior to meeting Daniel, I was told of his school‟s
belief that he had low self esteem, and poor social skills. The IEP, which his
school wrote for him, cited the belief that he could be immature in class, liked
attention, and often appreciated any help given. It mentioned his need for a
strict following of rules, and a great deal of encouragement, for him to be
sensible and not act the class clown. His school record highlights CAT scores
which, for Daniel, were deemed to be indicative of a visual learner; scoring
below average on each of the three „batteries‟ (verbal, non-verbal and
quantitative). In addition to this measure, Daniel‟s PASS results showed that his
school regarded him as being within the „at risk‟ percentile within his age group,
highlighting a concern about his negative self regard and poor attitude to work.
148
His most recent school progress check recorded a belief of staff that he showed
little curiosity for learning, and lacked motivation as such. It further cited that, in
the school‟s opinion, he demonstrated little responsibility for independent
learning and found target setting difficult. His school recorded that his
attendance at this time stood at 72%.
I first came across Daniel during a detention he was serving in the PE office
(BHD.I.170907). Later in that day, in a rugby lesson, I spoke to him for the first
time. As was the case on a number of occasions, this encounter was in the
main thanks to the convenience of the odd number of people participating in his
lesson (see for example BHD.I.180907). The paired structure of skill drills in his
lesson meant that, dependent upon the number of students who were in the
class, there were opportunities for participation in shared activities. Such
situations meant that I was able to bridge the initial divide between being seen
as an adult in lessons, of assumed responsibility, to one of someone who would
interact with the class in a wholly different way.
Partly due to his greater physical stature in relation to his peers, staff members
in the PE department were keen to encourage Daniel‟s participation in rugby
(BHD.I.110907). In our first lesson together, it was obvious why this was the
case. Daniel was a big presence in the group. He appeared to take solace from
the physical opportunities and freedoms within PE. Some staff had concerns
about a perceived bullying mentality. The ways in which some of his peers
reacted to his behaviours seemed to consolidate these perceptions; however,
they also seemed to look to him as someone upon whom they could rely to
misbehave when needed (BHD.I.091007). It was in this regard that his
relationships with peers and staff fluctuated over the course of our twelve weeks
together. They were the cornerstone of his experiences in the subject.
As we grew to know each other, Daniel began to speak about how the boredom
stemming from his lack of understanding was often a causative factor in the
emergence of these physical behaviours. Consequently, there was a further
149
level of disparate experiences between his times in different activity areas within
the breadth of study of the National Curriculum. Field notes of our interactions
showed ranging responses to his rugby and association football lessons; each
of which are further discussed below.
Daniel appeared to find it difficult to verbalise his thoughts and feelings about
PE. It seemed as though, at times, he enjoyed the opportunity to have a break
from his form time a little too much, giving only a diminutive amount of thought
to some responses. He did, during the later stages of our time together, become
more comfortable in discussing his experiences, albeit in a broadly descriptive
way. He was able to compare his experiences of activities in PE, with tasks and
pedagogies in other subjects. He was also at ease when discussing his affinities
towards the different activities in both his PE lessons, and other aspects of his
schools‟ curriculum. He spoke about a number of different activities, most
predominantly comparing his experiences in the rugby and football lessons,
which dominated his programme of study at the time. He compared his
experiences in these lessons with his greater enjoyment of individual activities.
Daniel: Cos in individual ones you have to like, you‟re more on your feet and its better because you know that you‟ve done it and no one has helped you
[BHD.T.231107.766]
His apparent desire for accountability and responsibility for his own
performances in PE, demonstrated his affinity towards the perceived ownership
of competitive outcomes. Despite PE experiences, which were dominated by
games teaching, Daniel spoke about the positive reassurances he took
pleasure in which came from individual task proficiency. Contrary to this, in later
weeks, we discussed his feelings in regards to the task of working with peers in
lessons other than PE, when he cited how, in this situation, he does not like to
work by himself. It seemed that some of his PE teachers used the option to
make Daniel work by himself as both a classroom management tool, and a
behavioural sanction.
150
RM: What about like your mates that you‟re with, or the class that you‟re in? Daniel: Well that‟s what annoys me as well, is that they put me on my own and its annoying
[BHD.T.291107.1334]
Despite enjoying the perceived benefits of individual task mastery in PE, Daniel
was keen to speak about his enjoyment of group work in other lessons. His
disparate conceptions of the effect, which his peers had on his learning, were a
demonstration of the fluctuating and complex views he had of his education.
These were underpinned by a desire for the opportunity to select the activities in
which he engaged. He would often talk about his disappointment with the lack
of curriculum choices that he had in PE.
Daniel: I just wait until I‟ve finished, but there‟s nothing really to learn about cos they don‟t do much sport, really they only do football and rugby, and basketball and cricket rarely, and that‟s it
[BHD.T.211107.498]
These thoughts were a reflection of the lessons that Daniel and I shared in PE
(BHD.I.311007). His lessons during this time were very much dominated by
invasion games. He reacted to each of these lessons in different ways, on the
face of it with a far greater receptiveness to rugby than football. Despite these
observed seemingly varying reactions, Daniel always held the belief that being
active in lessons, and being able to demonstrate personal proficiency, was of
noteworthy importance, irrespective of the programme of study or scheme of
work being taught at the time. He also spoke about how the performances of
others were important to him.
151
Daniel: Yeh its better like in the boy group, and then the girls group and then the mixed group because you, you‟ve got like so many good ones not all the crap ones RM: So do you like being, is that, so do you like being in that group because it‟s all boys or because they‟re all like the same ability as you? Daniel: They‟re all like the same ability as me
[BHD.T.231107.870]
Equally, alongside the aforementioned physical proficiencies of his
contemporaries, Daniel ascribed importance to the notion that, to enjoy the
experience of PE, he had to understand not only the purpose of what he was
learning, but also the rules and boundaries within these activities.
Daniel: I don‟t want to get better its just like I want to know like; sometimes when the ball goes off or something happens I don‟t know what‟s really happening, so I want to know most of the rules
[BHD.T.211107.395]
He spoke about the difficulties, which he had in comprehending what he saw as
a maze of rules that, in his perception it seemed, were there to be ignored.
These difficulties were evident in many of our sessions together, with his
confusion and resultant inability to follow the rules of a game seemingly being
central to the difficult relationships, which he had with both peers and staff
(BHD.I.111007). In a later interview, he described these difficulties as being
contributory to his behaviours. The time he spent in PE lessons seemed to be
nothing more to him than an opportunity to be physically active, with few
learning objectives attached. Indeed, learning through physical education was
something we spoke about during our interviews together, and something
Daniel struggled to come to terms with.
152
Daniel: Just some little things, little things I didn‟t know then I know them, and big things I did know last year RM: Do you think all the stuff you learn is like, is it all about how to do better at the sport, is it all about skills stuff, or is it other things as well? Daniel: Like little rules things to do, and like some skills and everything, I don‟t learn no skills in football but in rugby you do RM: So do you come back from the lessons and think that you‟ve always learnt something, or do you learn something, do you learn more in, do you learn more in rugby then because you‟re not as good at it as you are in football Daniel: I dunno, I‟m probably better at rugby than I am at football but I dunno
[BHD.T.231107.902]
He seemed to understand how he would learn things in PE through the physical
experiences, but struggled to think about this in any depth other than his own
specific lessons. When talking about his time in PE in relation to his
experiences in other National Curriculum subjects, he was able to make the
comparison between the intended physical nature of PE, and the hypo-kinetic
characteristic of other core subjects.
RM: What don‟t you like, what don‟t you like about the kind of, you know like the basic subjects like English and math‟s and stuff like that, what don‟t you like about them? Daniel: You just sit down, and its not fresh air or anything its just hot and its annoying, and all them lessons seem like two hours not an hour
[BHD.T.231107.997]
Previously, Daniel had shown signs of his behaviours being related to feelings
of boredom (BHD.I.250907). This was further corroborated when we spoke
about a theory lesson on Frisbee, which took place during his school‟s
Enterprise Day (BHD.I.281107). Despite the content of the lesson being related
to physical education, (a subject he had previously described to me as one
which he liked), he still found it difficult to remain on task, citing the reason for
his difficulties as boredom and a lack of activity.
153
RM: Did you get bored in that then? Daniel: Bit RM: Why was that? Daniel: Just sitting there not doing anything
[BHD.T.291107.1100]
In this instance, it was not the lesson content, which was important to him. He
held little regard for the fact that the subject matter bore resemblance to PE. For
Daniel, it appeared that it was the lesson processes and teaching methods,
which were of utmost importance to his experience.
Daniel: It‟s because I‟m outside yeh and I like it better than sitting in [BHD.T.181207.2253]
…..I hate just sitting there and not doing stuff, I like PE
[BHD.T.211107.333]
In our interviews, Daniel related his enjoyment in lessons to the environments in
which they took place. He spoke about the contradictions between other
subjects which, as he saw them, were relatively dormant in nature compared
with the more active nature of PE. Although in the quotation above he related
this to being outside, it was clear from observing him during indoor PE lessons
(BHD.I.011007), that the physical environment was not the sole determining
factor at play here. The actual nature of participation in lessons took
precedence over the environments in which they took place. Irrespective of
lesson content, or learning environment, Daniel appeared to struggle to remain
on task during periods of inactivity (BHD.I.291107). His attraction to active
participation in physical activities was further highlighted, when he later
explained it in the context of it being a factor upon which staff would underpin
potential sanctions to any poor behaviour.
154
RM: Yeh, but like, how would, would PE, do PE give you warnings and detentions and stuff? Daniel: All they just say to me is that they would stop me from after school clubs
[BHD.T.291107.1526]
Throughout these discussions about the subject and his affinity towards certain
sports, Daniel did not preserve much time for the importance of his teachers.
RM: So are the teachers quite important to you? Daniel: No not really
[BHD.T.231107.853]
Instead, he again made further references to both the lesson content and the
environment in which he was learning as being important factors in his
enjoyment, performance, and behaviour in PE.
RM: Yeh and what‟s different, well I asked the question and then the bell went so we had to go but kind of like what‟s different between PE and other lessons, what do you think to that as far as how you behave in PE compared to how you behave in other lessons? Daniel: Well its more um, space, you get more space RM: Yeh, so what does that do to your behaviour? Daniel: Because you‟re not really hot all the time because in some lessons it‟s really hot
[BHD.T.291107.1286]
Despite the importance of the lesson activity as previously mentioned, it
became clear that the physical environments in which he was taught seemed to,
in his interpretation, be a precursor to both his engagement in the task, and his
behaviours. Daniel‟s behaviour was something we would speak about at length.
When I first started in his school, the staff spoke of the „tremendous issues‟ he
was facing (BHD.I.170907). The great number of difficulties, which they
155
perceived him to face, could explain why he did not find it easy to verbalise the
antecedents to his behaviours.
RM: Do you think you‟re better behaved in PE? Daniel: Yeh RM: So why‟s that? Daniel: I dunno
[BHD.T.181207.2276]
…………Sometimes I feel wound up and sometimes I feel better
[BHD.T.211107.536]
Daniel was not able to do any more than describe incidents of aggressive
behaviours (BHD.I.201107). When we spoke on another occasion about the
specifics of an incident, which led to a maximum length fixed term suspension,
he chose not to offer an explanation for the causes of his behaviours. Instead,
he took the opportunity to legitimise his behaviours and cement his own account
of what had happened.
RM: So how did you stop yourself from hitting him? Daniel: I never hit him, I just grabbed him at the back of the neck like that and hit his head on the floor a little bit. And then he started being mouthy so I thought I can‟t be bothered
[BHD.T.291107.1601]
As a consequence, on this occasion, the actions that he describes were met
with what his school deemed to be appropriate sanctions (BHD.I.011107). My
time with Daniel was considerably shortened because of these incidents. This
is, of course, not even to speak of the disruption to his progress in class. Upon
his return, we continued our interviews, and spoke about whether his
behaviours might have been a result of his frustrations with either the individual,
or the task which he was being asked to participate in. He again described how
his difficulties were exaggerated in situations where he felt he had little control
156
or understanding of what was required of him. During our time together, it
became clear that it was important to Daniel to have a good understanding of
what he was being asked to do, be it physical or otherwise. In this sense the
importance of a perceived amount of control over the mastery of a task was a
clear indicator of the behavioural responses presented as a result.
RM: Do you think that you behave better in PE than other lessons or do you think you‟re like the same or do you think that you‟re sometimes worse in PE? Daniel: I dunno, I‟m worse in some lessons RM: What is it about certain lessons that make you behave badly; do you know what makes you behave badly? Daniel: I just get in a mood sometimes if I don‟t get nothing, if I don‟t get the work or anything RM: If you don‟t understand it? Daniel: Yeh, and if the teacher keeps on coming over and checking on me
[BHD.T.291107.1304]
Daniel demonstrated an understanding of his behaviours, which transcended
the subject boundaries. He was able to explain how the factors which he
perceived as contributing to his behaviours were not explicitly related to any
singular antecedent. As such, Daniel seemed to show an understanding of the
multi-faceted social construction of his learned behaviours. Furthermore, even if
in a very basic way, he was aware of the contextual differences unique to PE in
comparison with other subjects.
157
RM: Do you kind of see like, drama music and PE kind of thing, do you kind of see them as an opportunity to muck about Daniel: I don‟t mess about in music because I don‟t like the teacher, she would just give me a detention RM: Yeh, do you muck about, do you think you muck about in PE? Daniel: People say I do but I don‟t really want to because I want to get like, because like my behaviour is stopping me from getting me a good err level in PE. The PE teachers are saying that my behaviour is stopping me from getting a good level because at the moment I‟m like a 5a and they said I could be like 6 or a 7 if I stop
[BHD.T.231107.1033]
Despite previously citing little importance to the impact of his teachers, he
began to acknowledge the effect of the many contributory variables, which
combined to define his relationship with the subject, and his ability to negotiate
it successfully.
In general, Daniel struggled at times to verbalise his comprehensions of PE. He
found it difficult to discuss the reasons behind his experiences and, as a result,
the interviews we had together often included discussions, which contradicted
each other week by week. He struggled to come to terms with the bigger picture
of the subject as a whole, and his responses during our time together appeared
to be very much informed by the previous and most immediate lesson in which
he had participated. Despite these troubles, it was clear that his experiences in
PE were often defined and framed by a number of core issues, which he
deemed as having importance.
During our interviews, Daniel regularly expressed his wish to be outside during
lessons, and to be free from the constant interferences of a static learning
environment. He excelled in sports that allowed him to exert a physical
presence through his proficiencies. However, once such activities were
developed into „potted games‟ requiring thoughtful responses, he would become
aggravated when he was then not able understand their rules. His frustrations
most commonly ended in an aggressive outburst, which would result in a
158
withdrawal from the task. Despite his difficulties in making sense of the
sometimes complicated rules, he spoke about his frustrations at not being able
to participate in a wider range of sports during his lessons.
Daniel had some difficulties, both in school and at home. Possibly as a function
of his size and reputation, it seemed at times as though his peers would look to
him as a source of disruption in their lessons. During my time in his school, he
most often obliged to their provocation; involuntarily, or otherwise. He was
regularly the focus for unsettling „classroom‟ behaviours, which would often
escalate into acts of aggression towards others. As such, the sum of his
recurrent and persistent difficulties in PE was an escalation in the severity and
frequency of contemptuous relationships he had with his peer group.
5.6 Participant F – Paul (BCP)
Paul was a pupil in year nine who, for his age, was a tall and imposing figure in
his class. His school record demonstrated that staff at his school assessed his
social and behavioural problems as being representative of those commonly
presented by pupils at „School Action Plus‟. He was a commanding figure who
often held court over his peer group. He regularly spent his social time with
peers older than himself, and those outside of school life. He had received
support through local authority anger management courses and had lost many
days of schooling through indecent and aggressive behaviours. Issues at home,
and with his siblings, were deemed by pastoral staff in the school to intensify
the difficulties he has in school.
Soon after meeting Paul, he spoke to me about wanting to leave the school,
and be with his close friends who were, at the time, being educated at the pupil
referral unit. There was a sense that he did not wholly respect the school he
was in, and saw his lessons as opportunities to cause relative havoc with the
friends that he did have in his year group. He often pushed the boundaries of
what staff would deem as acceptable behaviour (BCP.I.090408), and,
dependent upon the lesson content, met lessons with an element of excitement
159
and anticipation (BCP.I.150408). Paul often talked to me about PE in a positive
light. It was a subject in which he appeared to be broadly gifted in relation to his
peers (BCP.I.150408) and one which offered him a number of outcomes he did
not deem possible through other elements of the curriculum. When discussing
the positive outcomes he deemed to be a result of his participation, he spoke
about his feeling that, in his eyes, having PE on his timetable made the day go
quicker.
RM: So how will you feel like, when you‟ve got a PE lesson yeh, and you‟re like, when the bell goes in your lesson before and you‟re on your way to PE, how do you usually feel? Paul: I love PE, usually RM: So is it something like that you look forward to in your day sort of thing, if you can see that it‟s coming up? Paul: It makes it a good day if PE is in it RM: So like this week is alright then, because you get three days of it don‟t you? Paul: Yeh
[BCP.T.060608.14104]
There were a number of timetabling issues for Paul and his class, who, over a
two week period, with three out of four lessons taking place in one week, had a
disparate allocation of time in PE. His perception of it being a subject that he
looked forward to was one, which was implicated by such an arrangement.
Paul would often choose to participate with a close friend, who also exhibited
signs of behaviours that might concern staff in their school. Both Paul and his
friend seemed to see the time in PE as an opportunity irrelevant to any form of
learning. It was a chance to have fun and muck about; something that was
evident during lessons in which he was proficient, more so than in those he was
not (BCP.I.180608 / BCP.I.060608). We also talked about how his
competencies in the execution of skills sometimes allowed him a privileged
160
place in his PE lessons. He was more physically able than most of his peers,
and did not suffer fools gladly as a result (BCP.I.150408 / BCP.I.030608).
Those who could offer a challenge to his abilities were not also seen as close
personal friends. In turn, he viewed ability as a key construct, which defined his
experiences in PE.
RM: How important is like, not just your ability but other people‟s ability as well. Does it like get to you when people are crap at something that you‟re good at sort of thing? Paul: Yeh it‟s annoying, because you haven‟t got no competition RM: And is it really important to you that you‟re the best of something then? Paul: Yeh, because I‟m like really competitive
[BCP.T.200608.14834]
Paul‟s competitive nature would exacerbate some of his behaviours during
lessons. When involved in tournaments of any kind, he would always choose to
start at the bottom of a challenge ladder, liking to play those he can beat easily
(BCP.I.040608). He liked to be seen to play well, and would check to see that,
upon mastery of a skill, others had been witness to it (BCP.I.160408). However,
he would often play down his abilities once he was seen to do so. He played it
cool in front of his peers on such occasions (BCP.I.070508).
Paul would often be in the thick of the action during lessons. He would get
agitated when having to wait to do anything, and would regularly be the one to
demonstrate drills. He approached games with enthusiasm, and would
constantly move to be central to its play (BCP.I.230408). Such a response was
defined and mediated by his abilities in the sport in question, with a differing
response during games in which he felt he could learn no more.
161
RM: So did you have like no intention of listening to Mr [name] and doing all the skill stuff that he was talking about? Paul: No RM: Why not, because like some sports you, some sports you probably would listen and try your best and try and improve wouldn‟t you? Paul: Yeh I‟d listen on cricket because I reckon that I could improve in that if I play it more, but like football and stuff I don‟t reckon that Mr [name] is any good at teaching that
[BCP.T.270608.15589]
There was a difficult balance in behaviours, which Paul appeared to negotiate.
In lessons, which he believed himself to exhume competence, although he
would take part to an extent, he did not see the need to engage in practices in
the same way as others would, or in ways that his teacher asked of him.
Equally, in an activity for which he had little ability, where he might look to be
out of control in some way, he demonstrated occasions where he would not
even contemplate participating (BCP.I.300408). This was sometimes tempered
by an attempt at a skill only after others had left the session, or when close
friends were not with him or in his group. He, like many others, only felt
comfortable when participating in sports in which he was able.
In lessons where he had a strong sense of aptitude, Paul seemed to enjoy the
bravado of showmanship (BCP.I.180608), which accompanied his
demonstration of mastery. Such behaviours would not occur during games in
which he was not comfortable in taking part. The example below is from a
discussion relating to a high jump lesson.
RM: I just remember, every time you ran up, what were you thinking every time you ran up? Paul: Just to try and make everyone laugh really, I knew I wasn‟t going to do it anyway, so
[BCP.T.270608.15585]
162
Surprisingly, Paul gave the impression that he lacked confidence when
attempting to master either a new or challenging skill. On such occasions, he
chose to mask his difficulties by offering a deliberately humorous response to
devalue the task in question.
RM: Well you don‟t need to, but with like, for the high jump lesson, you just didn‟t really, you pretty much went over head first most times didn‟t you, you were like diving in like you were diving into a swimming pool kind of thing Paul: Yeh RM: Was that just because you had like everyone‟s attention, and they were all like Paul: I just didn‟t want to do it to be honest, and I knew that it would be a lot better to go over head first RM: So you just gave it a go? Paul: Yeh, because it feels well nice jumping into those things,
[BCP.T.270608.15600]
His behaviours on such occasions would endear him to the group. On
occasions when he felt like he could not even go that far, he would often excuse
himself from lessons. His attendance and participation were a direct correlation
to the activity in question. If he did not want to take part in a lesson, he would
often simply be excused on the grounds of kit. At the outset this appeared to be
the least disruptive option for all involved; however, these were lessons which
inevitably ended in Paul looking for something or somebody to amuse him
(BCP.I.070508).
163
RM: Now that was your long jump lesson wasn‟t it, but you didn‟t, were you injured that day or was this one of your “I‟m injured Sir I cant be arsed” kind of days? Paul: I dunno, I think it‟s “I can‟t be arsed” RM: You normally kind of like, if there‟s an athletics lesson, because you think there‟s no point in athletics don‟t you Paul: There‟s no point RM: You‟ve said that quite a few times Paul: Yeh
[BCP.T.040708.15784]
On other occasions, Paul would use a feigned injury to achieve a similar
outcome. He believed that he could control the decision whether to engage in
the lesson or otherwise. Staff appeared to adopt the notion of a path of least
resistance.
RM: So what if, if he tells you like that its athletics and you‟re doing long distance running Paul: I won‟t be able to do that RM: No? Are you going to have an injury or something? Paul: I dunno, I might have, I might pick one up in RE RM: On the way? Pick one up down the corridor? Paul: Yep
[BCP.T.200608.15041]
When he did take part in lessons in which he was comfortable, he liked simply
to be left to get on with the games in their fullest sense. He did not enjoy skill
development tasks during lessons (BCP.I.010708). He spoke on a number of
occasions about his interpretation that you always learn something when you
play sport, predominantly through the medium of a competitive match situation.
164
Paul: That‟s well good that was RM: What was good about it? Paul: You just got like um, play like, don‟t have to like stop and talk about it and stuff. That‟s why Sir said “do you want to do this thing or just carry on” and I just said I‟d carry on RM: Because you‟ve said before haven‟t you about that, um, you think you learn better through games and by making mistakes and stuff Paul: Yeh
[BCP.T.040708.16198]
Paul liked games to have a sense of purpose, similar to the full versions of
games in which he participated outside of PE.
RM: So if you had a choice, like of a lesson, if you got to plan what you did in it, do you think like, would you play games all the time, or do you think that the skills stuff and the build up to it is important? Paul: Games, because you learn better in a game, because you learn from your mistakes
[BCP.T.060608.14005]
In Paul‟s case, instances of inappropriate behaviours appeared to be a
derivative of practices during lessons that were not applied in nature. His
responses to situations such as this were magnified when Paul did not have
something physical to engage with in lessons. Fortunately, in the main, the
learning environment in PE often facilitated such a need for his constant need to
fidget with something (BCP.I.030608). In some instances, this served to
dampen the potential for Paul to display off task behaviours. However,
conversely, his inability to pause during instructional time was often magnified
by the presence of equipment. This was regularly exemplified by hitting any
stray ball he came across over the fence (BCP.I.140508) or into a crowd
(BCP.I.040608). Such behaviours were demonstrable of the complex
relationship that he had with PE. Broadly speaking, Paul had difficulties in
maintaining appropriate behaviours under instruction. Furthermore, he had a
165
dislike for activities that weren‟t competitive in nature, and as such he much
preferred to participate on his terms.
RM: What made it better than some of the other tennis lessons? Paul: We got to hit it over the net RM: Yeh? Paul: I just want to play proper competitive tennis, because I used to be good at that, playing against my mates and stuff
[BCP.T.200608.14914]
His participation in lessons was framed by meaningful activities. During lessons
in which he did not perceive this to be the case, his behaviours would
deteriorate into actions deemed unacceptable to staff. In situations where he
perceived there to be little or no purpose to the task, he would regularly either
cause disruption to the lesson, or withdraw himself from it completely. We
spoke about how this might transfer into other subjects if they were taught
outside.
RM: In PE you do your learning like either outside, or in the gym or the tennis courts. Paul: It‟s better like that RM: Do you think it‟s that which might affect you a bit? Paul: Yeh RM: Or does it not at all, does it not bother you? Like, imagine if your [subject] teacher took you out and did [subject] on the field, or on the tennis courts Paul: Yeh that would be a lot better RM: Would it? Why do you think that? Paul: Because I‟d chuck stones at people
[BCP.T.130608.14628]
166
Paul would see the temptations of the prospect of misbehaviour over the
benefits of a facilitative learning environment (BCP.I.210508). Despite being in
an environment which he would prefer, he was unable to see past the potential
opportunity for disruptive actions. These opportunities were magnified by his
participation in extra-curricular activities. He spoke about the enjoyment he
derived from having fights during his football games.
Paul: But um, I can‟t wait to play them as well because like we‟re playing [name], and they‟re in the top two teams RM: Yeh Paul: And they‟ve got two of these kids from their school who are their best players, and this one kid took me out in the box and I didn‟t get anything, so I turned round and I just pushed him, he pushed me back, and then I like went for him but I missed because I fell over, because it was like real wet, and then I got sent off. So I just can‟t wait to play them RM: You‟ve been sent off a few times haven‟t you, I remember one morning when you came in and you were telling us that you‟d got sent off at the weekend for your Sunday team as well? Paul: I‟m going to break his legs though RM: But mate you‟re no use to your team in the final, if you‟re not on the pitch Paul: Yeh but I‟m going to wait until like the second half, I‟ll make it look good.
[BCP.T.130608.14468]
Paul also spoke willingly about times when he „two-footed‟ friends during
lunchtime games. In the past, he talked about such behaviours having been
used against him, resulting in the captaincy of a school team being taken off of
him. The relative longevity of many of these behavioural outcomes seemed to
be grounded in both the lesson content of PE, and that which follows.
167
RM: What about when you leave PE, because obviously you do quite a lot in the hour of PE don‟t you, you know, you can come back and Paul: It makes the day easier I reckon, makes it go quicker RM: Why‟s that, why do you think that? Paul: I dunno RM: Does it affect you in like the lessons afterwards? Paul: Yeh it makes me not as like, not as like naughty or stuff RM: Yeh Paul: So I‟m just like chilled out if you know what I mean RM: It chills you out does it? Paul: Yeh
[BCP.T.060608.14118]
His experiences of PE, albeit very changeable in their nature, provided an
opportunity which, in his experience could, at times, offer a calming influence
during his time in school. These perceptions were contrary to the agitated and
sometimes restless nature of his participation in lessons, defined by the
temptations of the subject (BCP.I.140508) and the requirement that he allowed
each of his peers to participate equally alongside him (BCP.I.160508). Paul
spoke about the consequences of such varying effects, and the changeable
nature of this reaction.
RM: And you said that it makes you like behave better afterwards sort of thing? Paul: Yeh but it makes me real lively as well though RM: Does it? How does that work do you think? Does it sometimes chill you out and sometimes make you Paul: Yeh it does it to everyone though, who likes sport
[BCP.T.130608.14577]
168
Paul seemed to give a number of differing responses about the reactions he
had to the subject. His experiences of PE seemed to be dependent upon factors
that he could not, at the time of our interviews, decipher. What did remain
constant in his experiences was the importance of being the focal point during
his classes. He was used to being either the most able, the most vocal, or most
dominant character in the group. When we talked about how others were soon
to catch him up in each of these regards, he spoke of his desire to maintain his
presence over the group.
Paul: I wouldn‟t get a very good mark in most things, rugby I might because I‟m bigger than most of them RM: Yeh, do you reckon they‟ll start catching up with you soon though? Paul: Nah RM: You‟re going to stay bigger? Paul: Yeh, I‟ll just get onto the weights, cane them
[BCP.T.060608.13873]
His peers were a constant source of comparison. He would compare himself
with them both in terms of his competence and stature, and had high
expectations that they should share his high level of practical ability
(BCP.I.020708). When this was not met, Paul spoke about his negative feelings
towards his year group. He felt most comfortable with friends older than him,
and discussed his wish to be allowed to leave his school as a result.
169
Paul: I don‟t give a shit to be honest, I want to go to [name] school RM: You want to change school? Paul: Yeh, that [PRU] thing, because some of my mates go there. Because if you get kicked out of school you go there RM: Yeh but you don‟t want to try to get kicked out of school do you? Paul: I dunno really, I just hate everyone in my year to be honest. I get along with the girls and that, but not the boys, so I hang around with the year tens and stuff
[BCP.T.200608.14774]
Paul, like others, had a complicated relationship with the PE. He exhibited a
repertoire of behaviours in the subject, which were demonstrable of the polemic
nature of his experiences. He negotiated the time in lessons by way of a
compromise between his yearning desire for acknowledged competitive
successes, and his impulsive responses towards demanding behaviours. Paul
spoke about PE as a subject, which can engender two very different reactions.
He talked about activities, which can sometimes, in a way, and by their very
nature, suppress his challenging behaviours. At other times, our discussions
allowed him to regale the many instances in which the lesson content and
didactic practices actually exacerbated his more hyperactive responses.
Paul talked about experiences, which were highly contextual. He spoke about
how, if he disliked the subject matter, or the pedagogic structures for that
matter, he would simply choose to behave in a way that would be rewarded with
both a disturbance and a level of attention. Indeed, he acknowledged that his
enjoyment of PE lessons was often centred around the opportunities within the
subject, as he saw them, to mess about. He recognised that when faced with
learning opportunities, which carried little task direction from his teacher, he
would take the opportunity as one in which he would simply try to make
everyone laugh. He spoke about his impatience when faced with periods of
lesson organisation, which would often result in restless behaviours that could
170
only be neutralised by surrendering to his innate need for a tactile engagement
with a physical piece of equipment.
Paul was selective in his level of participation during our time together. Issues of
kit and rogue injuries appeared to hide his underlying desire for a choice within
class activities. He spoke about his enjoyment of the independence possible
during individual activities, but still preferred what he perceived as the more
competitive nature of team (invasion) sports. He was articulate in discussing his
belief that he learns best through making mistakes in games. In turn, he spoke
about skill development practices during lessons, which would sometimes
cause his more trivial nuisance behaviours.
Paul‟s behaviours in PE seemed to be reactive to a lack of acknowledgement or
encouragement of his performances. He would often look to his peers and staff
for validation of his achievements and behaviours. To him, the recognition of
performance abilities, both his own and others, was a key element of his time in
PE. When such reinforcement was not forthcoming, there would often be
evidence of an undercurrent of bad language and unpleasant comments
towards peers. These comments regularly developed into occasions when it
became clear that, for Paul, there was an alarming theme of physicality through
the fabric of the subject. His behaviours were regularly beyond those of
adolescent mischievousness. They could very easily be perceived as
aggressive acts, which, in some way, allowed him to demonstrate his physical
strengths. Keen to maintain his physical presence as class mates start to catch
up with his height, Paul would use elements of PE to assert his dominance over
the group during practical situations.
5.7 Summary of Case Studies
At no times did case study participants speak as a collective group. Each
participant was kept separate from one another both within the practical
management of their interviews, and within my own subsequent extrapolation of
their experiences that are given here in this chapter. Within their experiences,
171
there were, however, a number of themes and patterns, to be taken up in the
discussion and interpretation chapter to follow, which can be identified as being
relatively common amongst all participants.
For a number of the boys, the physical elements of PE were its defining feature.
Daniel for example spoke of this physicality in a number of ways. He described
it both as a characteristic of the subject which resulted in an increase in his
obstructive behavioural tendencies, and also as something that led to a
perceived task mastery that was often not possible elsewhere in his curriculum.
These views were shared by a number of the more practically proficient and
physically larger boys, including Tom and Paul. When they discussed with me
the varying sports in which they participated during NCPE, they each placed a
high regard on theirs, and others, practical abilities. Seemingly irrespective of
the lesson content, they each approached lessons with an aim to demonstrate
their performance capabilities. In contrast, for some participants who were not
so practically able, including Jack for example, the physical nature of PE was
attributed to causing some of the difficulties which he faced in forming
friendships with his peers. In this case, he instead gained enjoyment through
the act of having contact with the ball. He was someone who, like many of the
other cases in this study, placed a high regard on being central to the passage
of play.
In achieving some extent of control over their behaviours, in lessons which they
were proficient and predominantly active, the boys recognised PE as having an
effect upon their behavioural and cognitive states. The conscious use of
physical education as a tool that would help them to manage their behaviours
was something that participants spoke of in a number of ways. Ben, for
example, perceived that the energy expelled during his time in PE resulted in an
effect that was akin to escapism from situations that would more commonly
cause him difficulties. Consequently, on occasions, the opportunities in PE to
demonstrate exaggerated behaviours without the interference of other demands
resulted in participants maintaining appropriate behaviours more so than in
172
other lessons. For some, such as Paul, these opportunities were perceived as
being acted upon within his own terms. Irrespective of the requirement of him,
this perceived control over a situation, in apparently choosing when and when
not to participate, resulted in more suitable actions when under direction from
his teachers. This perceived control was something that, as with other aspects
of their behaviours, the boys spoke of as being important in the eyes of their
peers.
The opportunities to work alongside peers, and to share common goals within
their teams, were seen as a trait of PE that had a number of recognisable
implications. James spoke at length about the social nature of participation, and
the subsequent importance of being given opportunities to be actively involved
in tasks in conjunction with his peers. As well as giving opportunities to work
co-operatively with others, these situations were also seen by some, including
Paul and Ben, as a time in which they could directly and favourably compare
themselves to others through cementing their relative practical abilities within
their group. When not perceived as being competent in this regard, a number of
the boys (including and especially Daniel) would behave in ways that were seen
as potentially threatening to others. His time in PE directly affected the relations
that he had with his peers in all other subjects.
Most of the boys appeared to be seen by their peers as the ones who would
„muck about‟, in each of their respective classes. Physical education was an
environment in which this prophecy seemed to commonly occur. In practical
learning environments that rewarded effort and ability with increased physical
freedoms, these behavioural tendencies appeared to manifest themselves more
frequently. Ben highlighted his perceived need for space and freedom, which
was given to him in some elements of PE. Furthermore, James recognised PE
as a time that could alleviate his boredom through the virtues of movement that
he himself could determine. For Tom, the inability to control the impulses, which
were resultant upon boredom elsewhere, were not an issue within his PE
173
lessons. Rather, such impulses instead resulted in potentially disruptive
behaviours that were a product of the temptations which he perceived to face.
The boys recognised that physical education had inherent characteristics which
defined it as being a subject that, to them, and for different reasons, was unlike
the majority of others in their curriculum. This recognition has been
demonstrated through the application of a range of sources which have
emerged from the processes of prolonged data collection. As such, this chapter
has highlighted the varying reactions that each of the boys had to the subject, in
a way that solely privileges the voice of each individual response in isolation.
Within these changeable responses, the unspoken commonalities that they
shared, on a number of levels, did not hide the apparent complexities of their
experiences. Consequently, this chapter has also cited idiosyncrasies in their
experiences, where there were times in which their responses did not agree,
and their response data did not concur. These varying responses further
acknowledge the context in which the individuality of experience must be
recognised. An interpretation of the potential reasons behind these responses,
including greater comparisons between them, will be given in the discussion to
follow.
174
Chapter Six: Discussion and Interpretation
This chapter details experiences that were evidenced on a recurring basis both
within, and between, the case study participants. There are a number of
noteworthy themes of interpretation that emerge from their experiences, each of
which are referenced below in the content of this chapter. These represent both
cumulative experiences and developing interpretations from which tentative
generalisations (relative to these particular case studies) can be made. So as
not to devalue the unique and personal details of each individual, each of these
realities is afforded equal weighting in the comparison that follows in the
remainder of this thesis. The discussion to follow in this chapter is one that has
also been conditioned, by my own learned truths, as I interpret them to be. The
question of whose reality is favoured, and my interpretation of these differing
realities, has been discussed previously in chapter three, section 3.1.
The summaries of the previous chapter have shown that the boys each reacted
in different ways, and to varying degrees, to the innumerable factors that
combined to define their time in (and reaction to) NCPE. The uniqueness of
each case has been recorded in the previous chapter. The summation of each
individual case has also been given within each participant sub-section, in
consciousness of the principles of case study design which guide this study.
These subsections have provided a résumé of the intricacies and nuances of
their experiences, which are the cornerstone of this thesis, and have been
evidenced through reference to interaction and transcript sources (see
Appendices C and I). The experiences which emerge from their voices, have
appeared highly dependent upon the situational nature of the lesson content
and the learning environment. This chapter now builds upon these sections,
providing the opportunity for a holistic discussion of the key recurring and
noteworthy points.
The inclusion of themes within this discussion is not restricted by any criteria of
absolute regularity of their illustration across every participant‟s data. There
175
were examples where this has been the situation, and where each case study
shared a commonly held experience that transcended all participants.
Conversely, there were also other instances, where the diverse experiences
that each participant spoke of, would not be expected to have been experienced
by each case study. This chapter pays reference to issues and patterns that
have emerged from the data of each of the six case studies; not necessarily
applying to each of them, but always to more than one.
The contents of each section hereafter are not mutually exclusive; the
experiences discussed were complex and inter-related and should be read as
such. Consequently, the structuring of these interpretations into sub-sections is
for the purposes of presentation only. Each sub-section is, however, a
derivative of the themes which emerged from within the subsequent case study
chapter. They are illustrative of the most common points of significance within
the perceptions of the participants, and are congruent to providing a holistic
overview of their experiences of NCPE.
6.1 Opportunities in Physical Education
Against the backdrop of difficulties experienced across the curriculum (Cooper,
1999d), the participants often spoke of the relatively unique opportunities for
movement which were possible within their physical education lessons (see
Eldar, 2008). The benefits perceived to ensue from their time in PE, consequent
on participation and enjoyment of the activity, were seen by the majority of
children and young people in this study as being exclusive to the subject. The
multi-faceted reasons for such a response, including where this was not the
case, were a demonstration of the complex nature of educational environments
(Suomi et al., 2003). Despite the highly individualised responses, in the
comparisons that they made between PE, and other subjects, participants
shared a relatively common view that their involvement in PE was something
that was a positive in their timetables. Such understanding demonstrated that
their experiences of physical education were, on the whole, a vehicle for a
number of opportunities not seen by them in other areas of their curriculum.
176
The young people involved in this study held a shared appreciation of the
opportunities available to them in physical education, many of which were
acknowledged as being a distinctive part of their school lives (Doll-Tepper,
2005). This appreciation of the subject was, broadly speaking across all cases,
irrespective of lesson content or the didactic behaviours of their teachers. The
participants spoke of the benefits and opportunities accrued from participation in
a subject which allowed them physical freedoms, in a learning environment
whose aims were different to those experienced elsewhere (Penney, 2000). The
subject affords a number of perceived freedoms and choices. There was, as
such, recognition within each case study of the symbiotic nature of the
relationships that were evident between the subject, and pupils with perceived
needs for space, and freedoms that were not commonly afforded within the
classrooms of other mainstream curricula.
One element of opportunity in this regard was the concept of the natural
spaces, in which such perceived physical freedoms were at their peak. The
inherent spatial opportunities that are a characteristic of physical education
were widely spoken about by the boys as something that met their appreciation
of physical freedoms. For Tom, these freedoms were an important aspect of his
experiences in PE, and were directly attributable, in his perceptions, to both his
performance and behaviour in class (BCT.T.250608.12390). There appears to
be a clear relationship between these perceptions, and previous research on
experiential education taking place outside of the traditional classroom
environment (Dillon, Morris, O'Donnell, Reid, Rickinson and Scott, 2005). In
Tom‟s case, he spoke about a number of physiological responses to his
learning environments, which had effects upon his behaviour. The
environmental faculties that existed, when learning occurred through the
physical, appeared to reconcile the boys‟ perceived need for learning spaces
that liberated them from the confines of formal classrooms. In physical
education, such issues have given recognition to the effect that a programme of
outdoor and adventure education can have upon children and young people
177
with SEBD (see Fox and Avramidis, 2003) and learning difficulties more broadly
(Estyn, 2009).
The opportunities for experience of and in physical space were comparably
more so in physical education than in other aspects of the participants‟
curricular, irrespective of whether the lesson used indoor facilities or outside
spaces. The boys spoke of the sensation of an element of physical freedom that
they experienced during participation. It seemed as though the lack of physical
barriers in physical education aroused feelings of relative choice for a number of
the boys (see Rikard and Banville, 2006). These sensations appeared to be a
product of the perception of ownership that the participants gained from learning
within the freedoms of the teaching spaces used in PE. The responsibilities that
were afforded to students when they learned through physical ways also had a
number of significant effects in regards to how the boys related to opportunities
to potentially misbehave.
For a number of the boys, the restrictive nature of other classroom based
subjects, in terms of their opportunity for movement, was perceived as a
precursor to their challenging behaviours. The perception that they had little or
no freedom in these subjects had significance, in their opinions, as a
contributory factor to their externalising behaviours. Furthermore, these
confined environments were spoken of as a difficult and causative precursor to
their negative responses (McEvoy and Welker, 2000), and hence, a common
perceived source of their often disruptive behaviours (see BHD.T.231107.997).
The relative lack of physical freedom in classroom based lessons, combined
with subject matter that the boys often saw as being inaccessible, for whatever
reason, was representative of common situations that were destructive to their
learning and behaviour.
In contrast, as a result of the comparably reduced physical constraints of their
PE lessons, some of the boys showed a heightened receptiveness towards the
opportunities to make positive and appropriate choices in their lessons.
178
Although such freedoms were seen as a challenging environment for some, this
situation did have positive ramifications in the behavioural responses of a
number of the boys (see BHB.I.011107). Ben, for example, seemed to be able
to positively channel the excess energies that he would have otherwise had to
contain in more formal learning environments. The physical freedoms, which
were consequent to the practical nature of PE, resulted in a reduction of the
feelings of frustration that often defined the participant‟s time in other subjects.
This is consistent with the findings of Supaporn (2000), who spoke of how the
type of activity in curricular PE, and the subsequent enjoyment of the varying
activities, had contributory effects upon the externalising behaviours of
adolescents.
At times, as a corollary of their learning being through movement, Ben and
others had the freedom to move and achieve success in their tasks in PE. They
did not perceive similar opportunities in other lessons and, subsequently,
viewed PE to have a value in its own right (Whitehead, 2000). Opportunities to
be successful, whilst being afforded the time to have individual ownership of
their achievements, meant that PE appeared to be an end in itself (Kay, 1998)
and not just a means to escape written work of any other kind.
Aside to the physical freedom of participation, the children and young people
also spoke more broadly about the opportunity for choice that was possible
during participation in PE. They often highlighted their perception that PE
included a variety of occasions that allowed for choice. Rather than just being a
subject of physical independence as already mentioned, they also described
situations in PE that allowed them choice of activity, engagement, partner, and
role. This perception of choice, relative to other subjects, seemed to provoke
feelings of comparative autonomy within lessons (see Travell and Visser, 2006).
In observation, this experience was, in practice, mediated largely by the
teaching practice, curriculum model, and lesson content that were in use at the
time.
179
Smith, Green and Thurston (2009) have highlighted the perceived importance of
such „activity choice‟ and postulated the underlying democratisation and
informalisation [sic] processes as being integral in this regard. Although
discussed in rhetoric through social class and gender, the importance of choice
to their sample, (who were not in any way delimited by SEBD as in this present
study), was not discussed in relation to its effect upon their immediate
behaviours. The authors did go on to discuss the structure and content of PE
being „characterised by varying degrees of formality and informality‟ that went
further than simply a termly choice of activity (Smith et al., 2009, p.219). The
data given in their study was seen primarily from the perspective of such long
term activity selection, therefore negating the very real choices that participants
in this thesis deemed to have in each and every lesson of physical education.
There was a conception in this study that the immediacy of the choices that
were inherent to PE had an effect upon the conscious behaviours of the
participants. In situations of choice in PE, participants recognised opportunities
to behave in ways not dictated to them by others. There were as such examples
of behaviours that were deemed as being uniquely plausible in PE, relative to
those deemed acceptable in learning environments that were more confined
(BHJ.T.301107.6197). When given opportunities of greater ownership of their
behavioural choices, the boys seemed to react in ways that showed an
appreciation of such freedom. As has previously been demonstrated, Ben
typified such an occasion when he spoke about his perception that PE allowed
opportunities to „run around‟, resulting in a reduction in obstructive behaviours
(BHB.T.131107.3026). However, such an appreciation did not always end in
outcomes that staff would find appropriate. These understandings are
consistent with the work of both Parker (2002) and Vickerman and Coates
(2009), who describe the teachers‟ perceptions of a lack of readiness to
appropriately deal with SEN type behaviours during PE. In this study, the
apparent flexibility in PE, and perceived forgiveness to behave in ways that
would be unacceptable elsewhere in the curriculum, actually often led to
evidence of such disruptive behaviours. These were a derivative of the
180
physicality inherent in the subject, and are discussed more appropriately later in
this interpretation.
As indicated previously, participants had pre-conceived expectations of NCPE
being a subject that allowed for relative autonomy in a way that was not
plausible elsewhere. This self determining attitude seemed to be aligned to their
perception of the chance to interact with relative independence. The relative
autonomy that was aligned to this perception meant that their time in PE was, in
the main, seen as a time when they were forgiven the demands placed upon
them in other core subjects (see BHD.T.291107.1304). For the child with SEBD,
whose time in school is often supported by special educational provision
(Travell, 1999), it was clear that this fact was seen as the cornerstone of their
regard for the place of PE in their timetables. Such independence was in
contrast to the difficulties that children and young people with SEBD often
perceive within other lessons (see Wise, 2000), which, in this study, the boys
often found to be a challenge both in regards to their theoretical content
(BHJ.T.301107.6197), and the nature of their delivery (BHD.T.231107.997).
Physical education was seen by the participants of this study as being a route of
escape from other subjects. This concept was seemingly grounded in their
appreciation of the freedoms found within PE, upon making comparisons with
the absence of such possibilities elsewhere. As previously discussed, it was
seen as an escape from the physical confines of classroom based subjects, but
also from the testing nature of academic, static learning environments. In
comparison, they saw PE as a subject that was, irrespective of the physical
learning space, a time that allowed for autonomy and independence. Indeed,
some participants did not regard it as being a subject of academic nature in any
way. It appeared as though the children‟s experiences were not only affected by
those present in their learning environment, but also „the way that learning
situation is presented‟ (Groves and Laws, 2000, p.26).
181
As a consequence of the difficulties that participants experienced in schools,
they talked about their struggles with the academic nature of the majority of
their lessons. The boys rarely spoke about successes being recognised by staff
in these „academic‟ subjects. Without here discussing the many causative
factors to their behaviour, it seemed as though their difficulties were lessened
through being involved in PE and, thus, they achieved personal successes
more often than they did elsewhere. Their time in PE offered an opportunity
from where they could actually achieve success relative to their peers. The
nature of PE meant that it was, at times, the only subject in which some of them
excelled. Irrespective of their practical ability, the positive reinforcement that
was given by staff was spoken of as something that they did not receive from
other subjects (BHJ.T.301107.6046). The importance of this concept, in that it
did not marginalise the boys due to their academic shortcomings, was seen to
meet their need for validation of their actions.
For some, PE was not only a learning experience in its own right, but also a
practical diversion which provided a cathartic sense of escapism from other
aspects of schooling. This has resonance to the findings of Jones and
Cheetham (2001), as is discussed in section 6.2 below. It could be presumed
that such a response could be recognised and utilised by staff, in planning for
opportunities that would potentially offer children and young people, such as
those in this study, a positive respite from the perceived demands of learning in
a formal classroom environment. Polat and Farrell (2002) spoke of the need for
opportunities whereby students could direct their energies into activities through
which they were able to feel a sense of achievement and success. For some,
PE provided them with the only such opportunity. In PE, the personal and
relative successes, which are not always rewarded elsewhere in the curriculum,
are sometimes met with greater levels of support and praise from staff. In turn,
the nature of the boys‟ PE lessons seemed to be facilitative of opportunities for
validation from both peers and staff. It did not appear to be a significant matter
as to whether this praise came as a validation of performance, or simply an
acknowledgement of participation. Irrespective of the format or regularity of their
182
positive feedback, many of the participants simply spoke of the subject as a rare
opportunity for them not to be „demonised‟ within their lessons (BCJ.I.180608).
This perception led to affective type responses that served to highlight the
differences between PE and their other curriculum subjects.
6.2 An Affective Response
The aforementioned opportunities for space and movement within PE provoked
a number of reactions, both in an obvious physical sense, and through
inestimable emotional responses. These intangible responses seemed to
involve the participants on a level other than the physical. The sense of affective
responses to participation have previously been spoken of in a number of
reviews, that look to the outcomes of physical education and school sport
(Bailey and Dismore, 2004; Bailey, 2006; Bailey et al., 2008). Broadly speaking,
many of the affective issues discussed within these reviews have been shown
to some extent through the experiences spoken of in this study.
In the present study, it was shown that the opportunities for participation in PE
could not only be seen as inciting a perceived physiological response, in
relation to their feelings of supposed catharsis, but also as something that has
affective outcomes demonstrative of a mental construct. Much of the affective
worth of PE has previously demonstrated its effect upon psychological factors
such as self-esteem (Fox, 2000) and generic psychological well-being (Biddle
and Mutrie, 2008). In this study, these responses have not been appropriately
measured to an extent that would allow a claim to be made against them. To
make judgements upon any of these constructs, solely based on the data of this
study, would be an exaggeration of its content. Rather, in this way, the merits of
the data have demonstrated perceptions that show the outcomes of physical
education to have an emotive element. It is this tacit and personal emotional
response, rather than the strength of a psychological measurement, that the
affective responses in this study have shown.
183
It was clear that the boys understood NCPE to have a number of influences
over their time in school. These influences were responses that, by virtue of the
open spaces and curriculum design in PE, the participants did not think to be
applicable in other subjects. As a result of the subsequent affectivity that was
inherent in the subject, PE was spoken about as an apparent reprieve from the
other perceived demands in their timetables (see Smith and Parr, 2007). As
such, the affective elements of participation were sufficient to evoke feelings
that PE had an effect upon the boys‟ thoughts and behaviours. Consequently, in
this study, active engagement in the processes of the subject was deemed
sufficient to, at times, counter the boys‟ repertoire of low-level reactive
behaviours that were often present elsewhere.
It appeared as though the environments that facilitated the expression of
behaviours unique to PE, could also affect a reduction in unconsidered and
inappropriate reactions. Many of these behaviours were seen to be low-level
unsettling actions (see section 2.4.3. and Steer (2008)). Such behaviours were
exemplified by Ben, who was often seen to engage in an undercurrent of
disruptive behaviours (BHB.I.131107). It was a common acknowledgement in
the experiences of the participants, that the gestured, physical and verbal
behaviours, which they often deemed reasonable in PE, were not seen to be
permitted elsewhere in their timetables. As such, the nature of participation in
physical activities in their lessons afforded opportunities for students to
justifiably behave in ways not appropriate at other times. Subsequently, in
legitimately expressing behaviours that were often unauthorised elsewhere, it
appeared that the inappropriate behaviours often engaged in by the boys in
other lessons, were not seen during their PE lessons. Daniel, for example,
spoke on a very descriptive level about PE as being a subject in which he
behaved more appropriately than he did elsewhere (BHD.T.181207.2276).
Physical education appeared to have an acute influence upon the participants,
providing opportunities that were on occasion to change their emotional state of
mind. The noticeable effects, that seemed to stem from the characteristics of
184
the subject, were seemingly a reaction to their active participation within it.
Furthermore, the varying effects to participation seemed to be described as
being the products of an integration of past experience and contextual
information (Groves and Laws, 2000). In this study, these effects were often a
proliferation of the extremes of their behaviours, and were not, as such, wholly
positive or negative. Neither did PE have no effect at all; there were very few
occasions where only a nominal reaction was evident.
In the main, participants spoke in a positive regard about the distraction from
their social and emotive problems, which was perceived to be gained through
engagement in PE. Their emotive responses to participation appeared to be a
consequence of their historical experiences in the subject. However, their
experiences also appeared dependent upon the particulars of certain lessons,
and as such were changeable relative to their affinity towards different schemes
of work. As such, the boys also spoke of a fluctuating response that came with
the changing nature of their lesson content. There were a number of occasions
where they discussed their reaction to participation as being either an excitable
response, resulting in heightened levels of emotion, or a calming effect that left
them feeling a greater sense of relaxation.
The boys spoke about these varying emotional responses in a number of ways.
For some, the nature of being active in their learning provoked energetic type
responses that either simply woke them up (see BCJ.T.040608.8667), or
resulted in hyperactive behaviours (BCP.I.140508). Indeed the contact within
games, and the movement that was an intrinsic part of PE, seemed to stimulate
the unstable feelings of restlessness that some of the boys experienced
(BCJ.T.040608.8607). Contrary to this, for others such as Ben and James,
there was a perception that they sometimes left PE in a calmer state. Identified
as a physical result of their involvement, the boys often described how the
subject could in fact pacify their difficulties as a result of the enjoyment that they
had through participation, and as such could potentially be a significant factor
affecting their learning (see Williams, 1996). They spoke about how it could
185
appease their frustrations, to leave them in a more relaxed state than that which
they were in previously (see James, BHJ.T.301107.6232). In this case, it
seemed as though the affective „time-out‟ from the demands of other subjects
meant that, rather than amplify their learning difficulties, PE was seen as a
subject that could facilitate the reduction in obstructive behaviours that would
otherwise be a negative influence on their learning.
As with the complexities previously described, there were variations both
between the case studies, and within the experiences of individual participants,
as to the regularity of these deviating outcomes. Their awareness of these
disparities, and the boys‟ subsequent ability to control their effect, was mixed.
With some participants, by virtue of a discussion of such awareness, they were
able to elaborate upon the permanence of these feelings, in respect to the
amount of time that their effect was felt. The temporal nature of such affective
responses (Groves and Laws, 2000) varied amongst the perceptions of the
participants. As with other key aspects of their experiences, the outcomes
appeared dependent upon the many factors that contributed to their
interpretations of different scenarios.
The boys explained their understanding that the longevity of these effects was
most dependent upon the activity in PE, and the subsequent lesson they were
to go to. However, irrespective of the complexity of their causation, the varied
reactions were spoken of as each continuing to be felt in the lessons to follow.
The effect of PE upon their behaviours in subsequent lessons was, as such,
noticeable and varied, according to the subject, teacher and lesson content (see
Medcalf et al., 2006). In this study the relative intensity of each effect, and its
longevity throughout the participants‟ subsequent lessons, was mediated by
similar such factors. These complications were acknowledged by Tom, who
described how the permanence of the hyperactive state that PE often left him
in, was tapered by the following lesson that he had to attend
(BCT.T.110608.11347).
186
Irrespective of the post-lesson effects of participation, behavioural or otherwise,
one of the immediate yet immeasurable psychological benefits of their physical
education lesson was that it was perceived by participants as a time when they
could choose not to concentrate at all. Such a perception has been described
previously as an opportunity in PE, in that the subject was facilitative of
opportunities for an affective respite from the challenges found elsewhere in
school (Cothran and Ennis, 1998). In contrast to ways that were expected of
them elsewhere in the curriculum, and without the close attention of their other
teaching staff in such regard, they were able to digress from the mental
challenges of remaining on task in an academic sense. As such, rather than the
struggles that they spoke of elsewhere, in being asked to stay engaged in other
lessons for a prolonged period of time, the participants direct reaction to PE
seemed to result in them each relaxing to some extent. In observation, this
relaxation of demand appeared visible in the form of the participants each
engaging in an active and physical way, in a lesson which they seemed to value
and perceive as being distinctive to others (see Bailey and Dismore, 2004).
When not physically participating, the participants seemed to remain involved in
other aspects of the lesson. Regardless of their physical involvement, they
appeared to remain engaged by concentrating on activity related issues. For
example, James seemingly mentally followed the route of a ball in game
situations, potentially kicking every shot in his mind, whether he was physically
involved or otherwise.
In contrast with their other subjects, broadly speaking participants regarded PE
as a lesson in which they would often have the opportunity to have fun (see
BCT.T.250608.12529). Over the course of the time spent with each participant,
examples of lessons in which they spoke of enjoyment as the primary outcome,
were plentiful. In the main, it was the lessons in which they held a perceived
proficiency, that the boys cited as being enjoyable (BCP.I.180608). This is in
line with other studies of experience (see Rikard and Banville, 2006), which
seem to regularly find that having fun is one of students‟ goals for the subject
(Dyson, 1995).
187
Consequent to these broad perceptions of enjoyment, on a number of
occasions, participants discussed their feeling that PE was an opportunity for a
break from the other rigours of the school day (BHJ.T.061207.6720). In many
studies of school experience, this has been shown to be a consistent aspect of
pupil‟s views on PE (Jones and Cheetham, 2001). In congruence with previous
studies of experience, participants most often justified this view as one which is
borne out of their perception that PE was a time of escapism from more
traditionally academic subjects (Cothran and Ennis, 1998). Furthermore this
appeared to be something that could evoke great relief when specifically
studying participants who deemed themselves to struggle in other aspects of
the curriculum. Coates and Vickerman (2008) have shown this to be the case in
their summary of papers relating to children and young people with SEN.
The experiences of escapism that participants spoke of demonstrated the
ranging manifestations and deep rooted nature of their behavioural difficulties.
These diverse experiences usually emphasised their difficulties. In simplifying
their positive responses, without here discussing any specific caveats of their
experiences, such experiences seemed aligned to the sociability of PE
highlighted above (Smith and Parr, 2007). Their most common reaction to the
subject demonstrated participants‟ understanding of participation in a physical
context as being a satisfying process. Although not a reaction that was
consistent or irrespective of lesson content, this positive regard for PE appeared
to be a manifestation of their historical relationship with the subject.
The motivation that participants had to take part in their lessons during my time
with them seemed to come from their expectations of the subject, which were
grounded in their previous experiences. Although participants in this study
spoke about their past experiences in PE as being, in the majority, enjoyable; it
should not be ignored that occasional papers have demonstrated PE to invoke
feelings of humiliation and inadequacy (Wise, 2000). For some, PE is seen as a
frustrating, embarrassing and barely tolerable subject (Portman, 1995; Carlson,
1995). Although the boys in this study each regularly spoke of the importance of
188
„significant others‟ in their lessons (Groves and Laws, 2000, p.24), this
importance did not seem to, in their experiences, have a negative effect that
might limit or restrict their behaviours. In contrast to these negative views, when
talking about the subject, each participant in this study spoke of PE in a fond
way. The affective responses to participation that have been discussed thus far
seemed to, on the whole, negate any such negative over-arching perceptions of
participation. It was clear that their relationships with peers guided how these
responses affected their behaviours.
6.3 A Socialising Effect
There were a number of affective responses that ran throughout the spine of
each case study, which were dependent upon the socialising factors that came
with participation in PE. The very nature of the subject involved a consistent
reliance upon others for many of the activities within. Such a characteristic
resulted in occasions when the participants‟ relationships with peers defined
their experiences of PE more so than any other factor. Regardless of the
curriculum model, activity choice, learning environment or didactic techniques,
the social dynamics that existed were a consistent factor that seemed to act in a
socialising way, and defined their reactions to their PE lessons.
Suomi et al (2003) highlight how, in PE, the interaction of the individual,
environmental, and activity variables affected the social experiences of their
students both positively and negatively. Indeed the often fragile social
requirements that existed through engagement with others in this study seemed
to run alongside the many aims and purposes of each PE lesson. Social
systems have in the past been shown to influence task accomplishments in
physical education (Carlson and Hastie, 1997). In this study these
accomplishments were often dependent upon others and, as such, appeared to
resonate with the wider outcomes of the need to co-operate with peers in a
physical way. Ben, for example, often appeared to use his own high level of
practical ability to facilitate the development of positive peer relationships
(BHB.I.281107). He had a high regard for the peers who were seen to him as
189
being the well-liked group within school. Seemingly in search of opportunities to
cement their place within their class, PE provided an environment in which
many of the boys could manipulate the processes of game play, to be close to
those peers, by styling particular performance abilities. These types of
behaviours were also observed in other case studies that, through their
perceived self-competencies, were keen on team games, which allowed them to
work with peers in a collaborative way (see for example James,
BHJ.T.081107.4894). The reverse is also true, whereby such situations were
perceived by some to help in their desire to display their own individual
particular competencies in sight of others (BCP.T.040708.16168).
As a result of particular examples of curricula dominated by games, the majority
of lessons that participants experienced in PE involved situations in which little
individual or independent control was possible over their outcomes. The
dependence upon others within these game situations meant that some
elements of physical tasks were inherently reliant upon one another. The co-
dependence between peers was central to active participation in the great
majority of their lessons. Their relationships with peers were subsequently
affected by what Ohman and Quennerstedt (2008) describe as governing
processes in PE that contend with individuals‟ willingness to do one‟s best, and
willingness to try. The boys‟ experiences were as such amalgamated with the
intentions of their peers, and consequently, the overall outcome of their time in
PE was underpinned by the relationships that they shared with significant others
in their classes. As such, those who contributed to the experiences and
perceptions of participants were, in the main, the contributors to the socialising
nature of PE.
There has in the past been recognition of the socialising effects of PE (see
Stroot, 2002), in that it is well suited to the promotion of young people‟s social
development (Lawson, 1999). In this study these effects have had both
conscious and sub-conscious forms of process, which were either sought after
as a primary function of participation, or which were an unknowing bi-product
190
alongside the other core aims of involvement in PE. In this respect, Cothran and
Ennis (1998) show a similar disparity of aims in the perceptions of students and
staff. They highlighted the dichotomy that exists in their two sets of opinions
with staff focusing on social responsibility as the desired social outcome of PE,
and students more commonly defining socialising for its own sake as the
greater matter of importance.
The notion that young people knowingly come to PE to seek opportunities to
socialise was, in the majority, true for the young people in this present study.
James, for example, spoke about his belief that physical education „helps you to
co-operate with other people and just generally work with other people‟
(BHJ.T.301107.6229). Indeed, being part of a team, and the associated effects,
was spoken of as a central tenant of many of the boys‟ participation. It was also,
for others, a relatively sub-conscious process that, upon reflection during our
interviews, they described as occurring in PE.
In some instances, the outcomes of these participatory occasions gave a sense
that the subject offered children and young people opportunities to reinforce
their relationships with peers. The majority of the boys had a small number of
close friends that acted as allies in support of their behaviours, and who were
endeared by the behaviours of participants. In these instances, there was a
broad agreement with Cothran, Kulinna and Garrahy (2009), who highlight the
perception of increased social status as a result of misbehaviour. In this study,
these de-stabilising friendships were mirrored by a similar number of positive
relationships through PE, when taken across the group as a whole. For
instance, for those participants who did not appear to be close to others in
class, PE did, on occasion, facilitate opportunities to cement the limited positive
aspects of their relationship.
It was apparent that, as previously mentioned, the importance of these
socialising processes was heightened for the child with SEBD. For some of the
boys in this study, their difficulties seemed to pervade their desires for social
191
recognition. James, for instance, often appeared to exaggerate his behaviours
(BHJ.I.161107), seemingly in search of friendships that would validate his
actions. The relationships that he, and others, had with peers in their year
group, meant that their externalising behaviours seemed to polarise the
socialising reaction of their peers. In these situations, participation in PE had a
varying effect.
For the participants of this study, deemed by their school to have SEBD, the
relationships they had with their peers were often turbulent. The very real social
difficulties experienced by children and young people with SEBD (Cooper,
1999d) seemed to magnify their responses in this regard. Much has been
written about the development of appropriate behaviours through physical
activity more generally (Don Morris, 2003). Through the enhancement of pro-
social behaviours in physical education, the subject has, in the past, been
shown to improve the social skills of children and young people (Telama and
Polvi, 2007). Vidoni and Ward (2009) have shown this to be the case, when
facilitated by a pedagogy of „fair play instruction‟ during curriculum PE.
Furthermore, Hastie and Sharpe (1999) also showed positive peer inter-actions
to have increased through sport education models in physical curricular. It is
worth recognising that this situation is an outcome consequent upon the learned
behaviours of both pupil and teacher, and was something that was only rarely
seen in the behaviours observed during this study.
In contrast to these occasions, it seemed as though some behaviours of
participants could at times actually serve to demonise them within their group, if
not in a visible or spoken way, then in an unspoken sense. The sometimes
fragile dynamics of their relationships with peers were seemingly exaggerated
during PE. By way of the physical nature of participation, PE had the potential to
sometimes magnify the social difficulties which were a constant in the
relationships that some participants had with their peers. As such, unfortunately
for some, the nature of such co-dependence could have negative effects, when
feelings of positive peer relations were unrequited (see BCJ.I.180608). In
192
placing a great deal of weight upon his interaction with peers, James
inadvertently sensed that PE was his vehicle to stronger relationships. Despite
the socialising benefits that he perceived, and that have been discussed above,
in practice he was not able to use PE to build further friendships in the same
way that others could.
Furthermore, for some in this study, such socialising opportunities seemed to be
exploited as times in which they could exert some form of authority over peers.
Paul, for example, made much of the opportunities to exhume a level of
perceived dominance (see BCP. I.040608), as is discussed further in section
6.4 below. The participants‟ relationships with peers were often tainted by their
apparent desire for one-upmanship, and their propensity to „show off‟ (see
BCT.T.030608.10491). Due to their additional needs, and the contextualised
nature of their learning difficulties, they seemed unable to achieve such
successes in an academic way, in classroom subjects. Subsequently, many of
the participants took the opportunity to achieve superiority through the physical
nature of participation in PE. Hence, this resulted in the often strained
relationships spoken of previously, and led to examples of contentious and
disruptive power relations within their classes.
Groves (1999) highlighted that young people‟s experience of inter-action in PE
is ultimately a result of what may be termed a „negotiation of power‟ (p.17). This
was evidenced in the present study by the boys‟ often central position within the
proceedings of their class, and the noticeable influence that they sometimes
had over their peers. The participants were seen alongside peers, as key
players affecting this environment in which each ultimately determined their own
location in class. The manufacture of such situations was seemingly a product
of the social relations of the group. The place of staff in this regard is not to be
ignored (Glasby and Macdonald, 2004). However, in this study, it appeared as
though the ways in which boys negotiated their central position in class were
more often an outcome that solely involved their relations with peers.
193
Physical education was an environment that served to highlight, in a visual way,
the outcomes of these negotiations of position in the group. A corollary of these
processes was the fluctuating reactions to the changing nature of the different
programmes of study in PE. As well as the times when participants would speak
of their perceived dominance of their group, during one or more particular
schemes of work, there were also occasions when they were each observed to
be somewhat vulnerable during participation in their PE lessons. Their
vulnerabilities manifested themselves in the explanations that participants gave
during interviews, in relation to their perceptions of the activities in which they
could not see themselves as being able to perform to the standard expected of
them by their class. Consequently, at times, these performance insecurities
seemed to be exacerbated through participation in PE. Both these power
relations, and vulnerabilities, which could occur naturally in any curriculum
lesson, seemed to be exaggerated by the highs and lows that came with
participation in a sporting context.
The ecology of PE seemed to bring about opportunities that were very different
from the more normal classrooms that they encountered for 90% of their
curriculum, in the understanding of a number of the boys (BCT.T.250608.12481
/ BHJ.T.301107.6218). Thus, the subject had a relatively unique influence upon
both their behaviours and subsequent achievements, resulting in polarised
experiences of elation and frustration. The experiences spoken of in this study
demonstrate that the very real pressures of schooling and adolescence were
both visible through, and often exaggerated by, their involvement in PE. As
such, there was evidence of fluctuating responses in the detail of their
participation, despite the acknowledged broader benefits of the subject that
each case spoke of to some extent. The difficulties that they did experience
during activities often seemed to be a function of their own place within their
class.
Their physical and social stature within the peer group meant that, irrespective
of their fundamental movement skills, participants‟ behaviours were often a
194
focal point in their lessons. For a range of motives, and as a result of
opportunities in PE to interact closely with others, the participants engaged in
many social processes in search of their desired social standing
(BCT.T.180608.11694). The somewhat notorious place that each participant
desired (and often held) within their own peer group was also magnified by their
time in PE. The interaction between peers was relative to the location that they
held within their peer group, and seemed to be evidenced by each participant
variously negotiating their own way, through participation in the differing
elements of subject content. Students would find a place and role within the
class, relative to both the lesson that was being taught, and dependent upon
what was being asked of them in their particular lesson. Often the role that they
assumed was a noteworthy one, at the centre of all that went on in class
(BCP.I.230408). For those in this study, it appeared that this choice of role
never resulted in the journey of least resistance. Even during activities in which
they felt proficient, their often obstructive response to the need for a place in
their group was regularly a reaction that appeared to be met with discontent and
concern by both their fellow peers and staff (BHD.I.111007).
The various roles that the boys held in their PE classes seemed at times a
product of the social expectations placed upon them. The perception that their
behaviours were self-fulfilling prophecies, reconciled the emotive and personal
reaction to their learned behaviours. In the most part, during activities that they
enjoyed and participated in, there did not appear to be conscious or pre-
conscious intentions to their behaviours. The participants seemed to act in ways
that were autonomous to them; and the many obstructive bi-products (as felt by
others) were unfortunate effects of the opportunities possible during PE.
Notwithstanding this, it would be wrong to ignore the fact that reflections on the
subject were also sometimes mediated by tensions with, and expectations of,
the behaviours of their peers. It was during lessons that participants either
chose not to take part in, or that they perceived themselves to have little
opportunity for success, that these tensions were at their most visible. Without
belittling these physical and emotional effects of their role in class, of comfort in
195
this regard were the contrary positive outcomes that came with the opportunities
in physical education to participate in something in which they felt capable.
More generally speaking, irrespective of peer relations prior to participation,
there were a number of outcomes of PE that were a result of the socialising that
took place during the subject itself. Many of these outcomes were factors which
seemed to be important sub-conscious features of their motivation to
participate. There was a sense from the experiences in this study that PE
afforded opportunities to in some way bridge the communication difficulties that
often appeared to act as a barrier to their social acceptance. If such
communication difficulties were to be overcome, this (at times) seemed to lead
to the development of positive peer relationships (BHB.I.161007). These
relationships appeared to be superficially founded upon the protection that
participants received, and which they reciprocated to others, by engaging and
co-operating in tasks not only on their own but through the unspoken team ethic
of the games curriculum (BHJ.T.081107.4894).
In regards to the development of healthy relationships with their peers, a
number of the boys most often spoke about their feelings of key friendships on
which they placed great importance. Groves and Laws (2000) referred to this in
relation to what they termed „significant others‟ (p.22). In this present study, it
seemed as though when feelings of friendship were shared by all parties, they
were able to find common ground through physical activity. There were indeed
incidents within the young peoples‟ experiences that showed their participation
in PE to be facilitative to the development of such co-operative values
(BHJ.T.301107.6229). This is in concurrence with the work of Dyson (1995),
who found students acted in co-operative ways both as a goal in itself, and as a
sub-conscious consequence of the nature of PE. The boys in this present study
seemed to speak of these co-operative processes irrespective of the activities,
environment and didactic behaviours. Instead they appeared to be influenced to
a greater extent by the boys‟ own propensity to engage in the pro-social
behaviours that have been previously described. In reality, as with most of their
196
experiences, their co-operative values were a product of the amalgamation
between each of these factors. The culture within PE, that serves to combine
these variables without delineation, makes it inappropriate to confidently assess
their impact in a positivist and causative way.
There appeared to be aspects of informal cultures within the wider
fundamentals of the subject that facilitated many of the processes that occurred
as a result of participation. The culture and identity of the subject is recognised
as having a number of characteristics that separate it from other curricular.
Bailey and Dismore (2004) intimated the significant benefits of quality physical
education, many of which they deem not to be replicable through other areas of
the curriculum. Moreover, the localised subject identity and ethos within each
school, irrespective of the wider NCPE, also contributes to the relative feeling of
uniqueness that surrounds the subject. As with a small number of other
practical based subjects, the teaching practices and lesson content within PE
(which define it as being relatively distinctive in their curriculum) are grounded in
the importance of relationships with peers. Where this became more noticeable
during PE, was in terms of how their relationships effected what it meant to the
participants to move and learn in different ways. By way of this inherent culture
of movement and physicality, which promotes the importance of the socio-
cultural environments in which children with SEBD learn, participation in PE is a
potentially key part of an alternative and differentiated curriculum.
6.4 The Physicality of Experience
As has been mentioned within the discussion of affective outcomes, the
movement that is inherent within physical education appeared to be a critical
factor in the boys‟ experiences, and was enough to bring about responses that
were many and varied. It was shown to be a time that, by definition, included
opportunities to learn through the physical that were not often found elsewhere
in the curriculum. This physicality manifested itself in many of the experiences
the participants spoke of during our time together, with each showing a great
receptiveness to the opportunities in PE for movement.
197
In this regard, the introduction to this thesis highlighted the view of Cole and
Visser (1998). They argued that,
„a curriculum which concentrates on practical, physical and perhaps creative experience in place of Shakespeare, a modern foreign language and conventionally delivered humanities would be more effective in meeting the needs of pupils with SEBD.‟
(Cole and Visser, 1998, p.39).
This argument has resonance with the data of this study. Within the
experiences that have been discussed previously in chapter five, the boys each
spoke of times when the physical nature of PE was seen as something that
made it a unique feature of their timetable. Daniel, for example, talked about his
dislike for the hypo-kinetic nature of classroom based subjects (see
BHD.T.231107.997). In comparison, PE seemed to meet participants want for
an active curriculum. In physical terms, the relatively dormant nature of learning
that takes place elsewhere in the National Curriculum was recognised to be in
contrast to the active nature of PE. James was one of the boys to speak about
how, „because you‟re always doing something‟, PE was regularly seen to be
preferable over other lessons (BHJ.T.221107.5841).
This perceived preference appeared to stem from the nature of the ways in
which they were being asked to learn during PE. Participants such as Ben
recognised the „kinaesthetic‟ nature of his preferred learning style
(BHB.T.111207.3821), acknowledging his desire for learning that occurred in
„exciting ways‟. It is worth noting that some authors (see for example Coffield,
Moseley, Hall and Ecclestone, 2004) have questioned the validity and reliability
of signposting learning preferences within models of learning styles. In this
sense, it could be considered that, irrespective of a preference for learning that
occurred through movement, the tangible benefits of participation were instead
a consequence of actually engaging in lessons; something that the boys did not
always do outside of PE. The perceived benefits of movement did not just
appear in the physical sense as regards to the development of practical
competencies, but, also, from a perspective of engagement in a learning
198
activity. As has been previously mentioned, their sense of affinity towards the
lesson content, combined with demands placed upon them that required
minimal self control on their part, appeared to result in positive feedback from
staff rarely received elsewhere.
Participants seemed to be receptive to the increased feedback and attention
they gained by virtue of the physical nature of their experiences in PE. There
were occasions where many of the boys, for whom performance ability was of
importance, spoke about the positive sense of validation that this opportunity for
attention gave. As has been previously mentioned, both Tom (BCT.I.100608)
and Paul (BCP.I.160408) were careful to ensure that their peers watched them,
as they engaged in tasks that they knew they could complete. For Tom, the
showmanship possible in PE was dependent on his own perception of ability,
and was therefore something that defined the subject as one in which he could
excel (BCT.I.190508).
These issues of performance opportunities seem to have resonance with
Goffmans‟ concept of the styling of activities, referring to the process whereby
individuals present themselves in particular ways and so portray a desired self-
image (Haralambos and Holborn, 1995). The styling of their behaviours was on
some occasions simply a product of the boys engagement in the task, with little
apparent conscious thought to who was observing them. In contrast, as has
been discussed above, such styling was also a corollary of the intended nature
of their actions being performed, so as to be noticed by others. In either of these
explanations, the perception remained that actions in PE allowed the boys to
demonstrate mastery of a task that, irrespective of it being a physical one, was
a rare time when they could „style‟ themselves in a positive way. The aesthetic
and evocative nature of participation in PE (Carlisle, 1974), irrespective of the
programme of study, often seemed to lead to the extremes of behaviours that
were seen. At times, this led to experiences being defined by competences.
199
As well as the opportunities for social engagement that permeate through
participation in PE, and that have been previously described, the boys also
seemed to be appreciative of opportunities that the subject gave for physical
engagement with equipment. The compulsions of some participants, for
something tactile to engage with, meant that they often appeared unable to
control the temptation to fidget with the items found in the teaching space, and
the objects used within class. Physical education was a subject that was
intrinsically forgiving of the need for something physical to engage with. The
permission to do so appeared to sometimes have a cathartic type quality in
appeasing participants‟ agitated state of mind.
Both Tom and Paul could not resist in engaging with equipment during times of
whole class instruction (BCT.T.030608.10467 / BCP.I.030608). For instance the
boys often engaged in the forceful striking of balls during instruction, and the
inappropriate manoeuvring of equipment. In some cases, these opportunities
appeared to become a direct and more sinister source of conscious interference
with others in their class. Conversely, such conduct seemed also to be an outlet
for their impulsive desires and was, at times, beneficial to the reduction of other
externalising aspects of their behaviours. Despite being off task when doing so,
in the majority of occasions there were positive outcomes worthy of mention
that meant other disruptive actions were subdued as a result.
In engaging their need for physical contact with something in this way, the
participants appeared less likely to then involve themselves in greater acts of
disruption. The tactile nature of the equipment that was used during PE also
seemed to aid in the struggles that some of the boys had in maintaining
attention over the course of a lesson (see for example BCJ.I.200508). The
benefits of having something physical to concentrate their efforts upon
appeared to be a small price to pay to maintain their concentration and sustain
task engagement. For example, James often seemed to be transfixed by the
physical movement of the ball within game-play (BHJ.I.301107). In allowing the
boys opportunities to engage in actions that they can wholeheartedly immerse
200
themselves within, such as being able to continue to work with equipment
during instructional time, the boys seemed more likely to preserve their
concentration over a longer period of the lesson. The aforementioned physical
manipulation of objects was a prime example of such a compromise. Where
such opportunities were not given on the grounds of health and safety, for
instance in the stricter control of throwing activities in athletics, their behaviours
were noticeably more disruptive. Such disparities are further examples of the
complexities that define the boys‟ experiences in PE.
Irrespective of lesson content, the participants‟ appreciation of the physical
nature of PE potentially resulted in a greater ability to understand their sense of
place in lessons. The ability to manipulate their physical world, which could be
postulated as being developed through participation in PE, would logically have
wide ranging benefits. Although none of the participants were described as
having a condition affecting their movement capabilities, and none appeared to
demonstrate extreme performance difficulties aside to natural variation, there is
an obvious value in the development of fine motor skills and hand-eye co-
ordination for all children and young people. The potential enhancement of such
attributes is of greater benefit for pupils with SEBD, as it could have great
influence on their learning elsewhere.
The physical nature of successful participation, within a stimulating environment
such as PE, bought about other more immediate benefits aside to these longer
term improvements in skill and co-ordination. This was evident in a number of
particular discussions regarding the qualities of participation, which ended in the
discussion of sensations akin to the concept of „flow‟. The concept is more
widely written about in terms of the feelings described after sporting excellence
(Jackson and Csikszentmihalyi, 1999). In some activities, although it would be
difficult to assume a complete level of absorption in their lessons, participants
described feelings of fulfilment through the realisation of performance. The
sense of sensory feedback provided by participation seemed resonant to the
201
proprioceptive outcomes when performance successes appeared, to an extent,
self actualising.
Jack, for example, talked about how he experiences the sensation of hitting a
tennis ball (BCJ.T.040608.8430). He described how the physical sensations of
feedback, after hitting a ball, gave him positive feelings of success irrespective
of the success of the shot, or the context in which it was made. There was a
very real difference between those boys like Jack, who chose to hit balls over
the fences or into the goals for the pure physical pleasure of doing so, and
those who did so into the crowd or peers and staff, for the apparent purpose of
hurting others (see BCP.I.040608). When enacted in a positive and non-
threatening way, the outcomes of similar such opportunities were also
noticeable within the experiences of boys, who spoke about the „sensation‟ of
success.
Alongside the most common beneficial products of the physicality of learning in
PE, there were also negative behaviours which appeared to be a consequence
of the conscious actions of some of the boys. As has been described
previously, the boys were often focal points in the classes, and the subject gave
opportune moments in which a representation of their place in the group could
be seen and cemented. Such actions appeared to be cathartic in nature for the
boys themselves, and were akin to the concept of „letting off steam‟ that others
have previously found to be of importance to boys (Fisher, 1996). Ben for
example spoke about the way in which he consciously used the physical nature
of his rugby lessons, as a vehicle to assert retribution upon peers who had
previously upset him (BHB.T.271107.3251). He saw this as a legitimate
reprieve of the personal feelings of anger that he often felt towards peers.
Consequently, the physical nature of the subject acted as an affectation of their
dominance over the group; and allowed for them to hold court over their peers.
For example, the disparity between Daniel‟s fluctuating relationships with peers
in PE lessons, and the positive friendships he enjoyed with them in extra-
202
curricular environments, seemed to be testament to the physicality that he
brought to the playing field.
Irrespective of their own practical abilities, some participants seemed to view
their position in class to be one of assured dominance. As such, this sometimes
resulted in responses that were quasi-aggressive in nature, and often wholly un-
related to the lesson content of the PE class. Paul spoke about such
behaviours, when describing how he would look forward to lessons taking place
outside of the usual classroom environments. The stimuli of being taught
outside appeared to rouse pre-meditated intentions to act in an antagonistic and
violent way towards peers (BCP.T.130608.14628). Responses such as these
were often seen by others as befitting of bully-like behaviours, which were, in
the eyes of some participants, possible through opportunities in PE.
There was a sense that these aggressive responses were expected of the
participants because of both their physical size and unspoken dominance. As
they were often one of the most vocal members of their group, it appeared to be
a self fulfilling prophecy that they would also be the ones who were to show
physical strength in such a way. The chance to demonstrate their strengths and
physical prowess was widely afforded through the games dominated curriculum
that most experienced during the period of this research. In contrast to the
concerns about such lack of variety that have been cited elsewhere (Rikard and
Banville, 2006), this relatively limited diet of physical education was well
received by each of the participants. Although occurring over a continuous
twelve week period, they did not seem to mind the consistency of their
curriculum provision. Such uniformity within their provision was well received by
the boys, due to the nature of the games that they were engaged in, however
the consistency potentially became the source of further opportunities that
intensified the physically dominant responses to participation.
These responses during all lessons, but especially games, were dependent
upon the performance abilities of the participants. The boys each seemed pre-
203
occupied with the nature of ability. This was illustrated through many of the
inter-actions that were a product of time with each of the participants. Their
perceived abilities were something that was widely spoken about in their
experiences, and seemed to be of seminal importance to each of them. Daniel,
for example, seemed to take solace from being able to demonstrate task
proficiency in PE (see BHD.T.231107.766). In conversation, it was clear that
this was not always the case in written tasks of other subjects. The same was
true for Paul. This was further demonstrated within our discussions surrounding
the significance that he placed upon both his own, and others, performance
abilities (BCP.I.150408).
Whether it was their own skill level during tasks in comparison to others, or the
general ability of the staff, the participants each gave great weight to the stigma
placed upon a lack of performance competency within their peer groups.
Indeed, their perceptions of ability were often relative to that of their peers (Lee,
Carter and Xiang, 1995). As was highlighted in the previous chapter, Ben
compared himself to peers in such a way, in his assessment of his own and
others abilities in basketball (BHB.T.111207.4411). As with other studies (e.g.
Williams and Woodhouse, 1996), these perceptions varied significantly between
activity areas. These perceptions were irrespective of self-assessed
improvements in ability, through PE, which have been debated elsewhere
(Rikard and Banville, 2006; Smith and Parr, 2007).
For the majority of the boys in this present study, the matters of significance did
not seem to be their mastery of skill over time. Neither were they seen to be a
manifestation of the boys need for environments in PE that challenged and
tested their prior competencies (see Dyson, 1995). Rather, their ability served
purely as an instantaneous form of peer validation and gratification. From the
importance that many of them placed upon the visible demonstration of skill, it
could be cautiously assumed that the boys shared an ego-centric achievement
orientation that is representative of a level of self-centeredness involved in the
development of superior abilities (Butler, 1999).
204
Such an orientation had practical connotations that were evident in their levels
of participation in a range of activities. As has been discussed previously, when
they perceived themselves as being capable, relative to their peers, many of the
boys used their proficiency to consolidate their commanding position in class in
a way that was seen by all. When participants were asked to engage in
activities during which they felt uneasy, due to a perceived lack of task mastery,
their vulnerabilities manifested in either them discharging themselves from the
lesson, or instead acting in an aggressive way that was seemingly used as a
„smokescreen‟ to their difficulties. Ridgers, Fazey and Fairclough (2007)
highlight how, inevitably, pupils will make interpersonal comparisons about their
physical capabilities in PE that can result in a perceived athletic incompetence
and subsequent fear of negative evaluation. As Wright and Burrows (2006)
attest, the far from neutral perceptions of ability seen in this study, similar to
those described in their own work, appeared to be grounded in masculine
discourses, and demonstrative of a privileging of skills and competencies
associated with organised sport.
The relationship between perceived competencies, and meaningful
participation, was a clear one. It has been shown that perceived competence is
related to children‟s interest in an activity (Weiss and Horn, 1990). As a result of
their perceived aptitude, the students in this study seemed to regard
opportunities for competition in physical education to be of importance (see
BCT.T.210508.10092 / BCP.T.200608.14834). Gray, Sproule and Wang (2008)
have also shown just that: a positive relationship between participants‟
perception of competence and the enjoyment and value attached to games,
with secondary school aged pupils describing how they would consciously
decrease their engagement in class during activities, that they perceived
themselves to be incompetent in. These perceptions of ability have clear
connotations upon their outlook on competitive environments (see Leah and
Capel, 2000), with Dyson (1995) highlighting students‟ concerns about how an
excessive emphasis on competition (irrespective of ability) would reduce their
participation and enjoyment of PE. The participants‟ sense of competency in
205
this study, whether accurate or otherwise, was a key element in how the
physical nature of PE would directly affect the experiences and outcomes of
their participation in competitive team games.
There was indeed a broad agreement with the notion that the experiences,
which participants classed as being meaningful and worthy of discussion, were
largely synonymous within games and sports. This appeared to be in line with
the „prevailing tendency since the 1960s for PE curricula to be dominated by
games‟ (Smith et al., 2007, p.185). Seemingly because of their curriculum diet
in physical education, the boys often spoke of the concentration upon particular
competitive and performance orientated team games. This has resonance with
the work of Kirk (2004), and demonstrates a relationship with similar responses
from children and young people that were seen in other studies of this kind (see
Jones and Cheetham, 2001; and Williams and Woodhouse, 1996).
The content of lessons, which were the foundations of these experiences,
involved processes of learning and governing that fluctuated according to the
intentions of each of their teachers. Without discussing this matter explicitly with
staff, it appeared as though, at times, the choice to concentrate on a curriculum
of this type was potentially a conscious decision that was made by staff to allow
their classes some control over the content and outcomes of their lessons. This
appears to be a reflection upon what Hastie and Siedentop (1999) describe as
being a common negotiation of how the processes within lessons are
structured. They describe the compromise whereby it is often seen that
teachers will reduce the demands of the instructional system, in return for
greater student co-operation in regards to the behavioural management
systems that are in place. The effects of the observed games-dominated
curricula have been previously discussed in regards to their propensity to
provoke a number of differing behaviours, both positive and negative in nature.
206
6.5 Summary of Interpretations
Broadly speaking, as is in line with the expectations of an interpretivist study,
the analysis of the raw data has shown the mixed economy of experiences,
which each individual participant had in PE. The different interests, abilities and
attitudes that are commonly shown in studies of physical education experiences
(Graham, 1995), alongside the individualised and differential nature of
difficulties that participants in this study attest to (Nelson et al., 2003), rightly
generate a number of varying interpretations. There were as such strong
notions of multiple truths in these experiences. The appreciation of multiple and
subjective truths runs counter to the modernistic ideological concept of a single,
testable truth, as measured by positivist (experimental) designs, so often a
feature of studies included in this discussion, and critiqued in chapter two of this
thesis.
It must be remembered here that a person‟s behaviour (and hence experiences)
is/are „filtered through an amalgam of several influences‟ (Layder, 2006, p.146).
It was clear from the experiences of the participants in this study that the
relative uniqueness of PE, in comparison with the majority of other subjects,
comes through the combination of many external influences. The behaviours
that the participants spoke of were socially constructed. The data have shown
that, from the individual realities found within tales of experiences, multiple
truths emerge that are each trusted themselves as being a representation of the
participants understanding at that time, and within a culturally bound context.
The ways in which participants defined their time in PE was through social
definitions that they related to their own, personal learned experiences.
Meaning, in turn, was discovered through an affective process by which
learners experience reality, and relate events to the self (Fernandez-Balboa,
1997). The nature of „indigenous typologies‟ of language that defined
participants‟ experiences were testament to a highly personalised response to
physical education. Their engagement in PE, and my subsequent
understanding of it, is thus framed in terms of personal meaning.
207
„What becomes useful understanding is a full and thorough knowledge of the particular, recognising it also in new and foreign contexts. The knowledge is a form of generalisation too, not scientific induction but naturalistic generalisation, arrived at by recognising the similarities of objects and issues in and out of context and by sensing the natural co-variations of happenings.‟
(Stake, 1978, p.6).
The natural variations in the content and implementation of curricular appeared
to have a wide ranging effect upon the perceptions that participants had of the
nature and purpose of PE. It has been demonstrated, through the reported data
in chapter five and the interpretations included here, that engagement in PE
was a highly personalised experience which acted as a catalyst to participants‟
behaviours. It was an experience that valued the spatial relationship within
active learning environments, and the interpersonal relationships that were
developed through participation. It was noteworthy that each of these factors
appeared magnified as a result of the social and emotional difficulties
experienced by the boys. However these are issues that were not universally
unique to those deemed to have SEBD, when compared with the literature of
others, but were potentially magnified and more visible due to the demographics
and characteristics of this population.
The beneficial responses that the boys spoke of should not be seen as blind to
the additional challenges that they had in consequence of opportunities to act in
relative physical freedom. As briefly described in the introduction to this thesis
as an inter-actional perspective, the participants‟ reactions to PE were deemed
to be a product of both the individual and the environment. The relatively unique
environment of the subject (Talbot, 1999), in comparison with other subjects in
the National Curriculum, meant that the sense of place that the boys appeared
to gain through participation and successes in PE was something not felt in
other lessons. The opportunities that learning through the physical gave to each
of them only appeared possible through the inimitable physicality of PE. The
learned motor behaviours, which were a product of such physicality, appeared
to provide participants with a visible and tangible mechanism that helped to
208
cement their positive reactions to the physical learning environments. This
reflects what Parry (1998) described as being the development of human
excellences through participation, aside to the maturity of practical skills that
would be expected through the physical domain.
Irrespective of the mechanisms behind their reactions to the subject, broadly
speaking PE was experienced as a positive in the timetables of each case
study; as has been shown to be the case in reviews of previous studies of this
kind (Coates and Vickerman, 2008). At times, it was a subject that participants
spoke of as being a highlight of their schooling. The positive reinforcement of
behaviours which were not often recognised in other lessons, meant that their
relative successes were magnified during PE. As such, the boys experienced
PE as a time when they were not demonised by staff. Irrespective of their peers
reactions to their abilities, the praise of their abilities by teaching staff was
spoken of as a key factor within the ways that they experienced PE.
The participants, each with difficulties that pervaded their time in school, gave
thought to how they negotiated their path through physical education. They
appeared to be appreciative of the level playing field that existed in physical
education. Their association with the subject seemed to be in looking for a
comfort zone from within which they could contribute to lessons that did not
privilege intellectual task engagement. This could of course be a result of a
number of factors including, amongst others, lesson content, learning
environment, didactic practice, and curriculum structure. The participants‟
experiences seem to demonstrate yet further reflections of the curriculum
privileging „particular activities, team games, in a way, which run contrary to the
development of equitable practices‟ (Williams, 1996, p.31). This appeared to be
of significance for those boys who either did not have performance capabilities
that were similar to their peers, or to those that preferred the individual activities
that were only very occasionally a feature of their time in PE.
209
It is also worth remembering here that the privileging of certain activities in PE
meant that participation was not always seen as a panacea to the many
challenges faced by the case study participants in their school lives. Despite
being a subject that was seen in a positive light for each of the boys in this
study, either at times or consistently, there remained a changeable and
disparate nature within their experiences. Aside to the number of positive
reactions that they perceived subsequent to participation, there were times
where it became apparent that PE also contributed to a proliferation of
challenging aspects of their behaviours. The opportunities to have ownership of
their behaviours in PE magnified their profound difficulties, and actually resulted
in an increase of destructive incidents. It seemed as though the temptations
found within PE contributed at times to the complexities of their schooling.
Whether such thoughts were purely relative to other subjects, or were a product
of the learning processes unique to PE, was a matter of disagreement. The
inter-section of the contributions to their experiences appeared sympathetic to
the inter-actional (social) model of disability first mentioned in the introduction to
this thesis.
As a result of the multiple factors that contribute to their social construction of
experience, the participants‟ reactions to PE were rarely straightforward. In
making sense of the incoherences between cases, and the sometimes
fluctuated stories of individuals, this discussion has highlighted the fragmented
response to PE that seemed dependent upon an inestimable number of factors.
There was not a homogenizing singular response that evidenced the identities
of children with SEBD (see Cooper, 1999a) in PE. Much appeared responsive
to the interplay between the context of their difficulties, and the multi-faceted
nature of a subject that is deemed to reward both equity and excellence (Morley
et al., 2005). There was, as such, little evidence of a simplistic binary-type
response to the content of the subject, and the processes that it contains.
Despite this lack of uniformity between case studies, broadly speaking, and
consistent with prior research, the concepts of relevance, enjoyment, subject
210
and activity preferences, achievement, and ability, have each come through
from the participants‟ experiences in physical education. These themes were
identified by Lord and Jones (2006) as those most often studied in research
pertaining to student voice. Without prior planning, the way in which these
concepts were structured in this discussion also recognised some of the broad
categories defined by Bailey et al (2008) as the domains within which the
benefits claimed for physical education and school sport are often made
(physical, social, affective). However, despite their congruence with previous
studies, the exaggerated reactions of participants with SEBD, either positive or
negative in nature, were most often seen as an extreme response. Their
experiences could be defined by an acknowledgement that participation in PE,
through its physical and unrestrictive nature, accentuated a number of issues.
These included its perceived effect upon their immediate and longer term
relationships with peers, their pro-social and disruptive behaviours, and their
ability to consciously control their reactive and physical behaviours.
211
Chapter Seven: Conclusions
The aim of this research was to transcend two distinct fields of study, namely
special education and physical education, which have thus far only sparingly
been considered in conjunction with each other. It has looked to give voice to
the way in which such boys understand their time in PE, in relation to its
perceived effects upon the wider experiences of their time in school. As such,
the overarching purpose of this study has been to highlight the physical
education experiences of children and young people with social, emotional and
behavioural difficulties.
Furthermore, the objectives of this thesis (as discussed in section 1.2) were to
provide an understanding, from the perspective of the participants concerned,
about the place of PE in their lives. In seeking to achieve these aims and
objectives, this research expresses the perceptions that each case study held,
regarding the nature and purposes of PE. The experiences included in this
study have highlighted a number of core issues that children and young people
with SEBD perceive as defining their perceptions of PE. These have been
discussed in the preceding chapter, and are concluded hereafter.
The case studies presented have recognised the distinctive and potentially
unique relationship that exists between children and young people with SEBD,
and the subject of NCPE. This study has highlighted a disparity with findings of
studies pertaining to the physical aspect of some SEN. Previous studies relating
to additional needs that are of a physical nature have shown that these
children‟s experiences of PE were limited and somewhat restricted by the
behaviour of others. Such experiences have been shown to lead to negative
self-image and emotional distress (Blinde and McCallister, 1998; Goodwin and
Watkinson, 2000; Fitzgerald et al., 2003b; and Fitzgerald, 2005). This study,
concentrating on the SEBD sub-set of SEN, has not corroborated these findings
to any consistent extent. Furthermore, there was little evidence within the
experiences of the participants in this study, which demonstrated a negative
212
restriction of behaviours which was enforced by peers in their class. As such,
there was a very real difference in responses between those that have been
previously reported to have come from children and young people with a
physical special educational need (Blinde and McCallister, 1998), and those
who, like the participants in this study, are deemed to have an emotional
difficulty.
Coates and Vickerman (2008) re-affirm that the majority of research that
examines the PE perspectives of children with SEN do so from the perspective
of a physical disability, and „as such may not prove representative of the full
sphere of special educational needs‟ (p.170). This study has closed a part of
this gap, showing the perspectives of participants with SEBD to be rich and
diverse. In contrast to the aims of their curricula, their motivation to participate
appeared to be one that was framed in the desire, (and in some cases need),
for a removal from the static learning environments found in other classrooms.
Although widely seen by the participants in this study as a subject requiring little
or no cognitive effort, and a source of escapism from the rigour of learning
elsewhere, they did highlight a number of elements to their involvement that
were more than simply an avoidance of other subjects.
Physical education was shown, in the experiences of participants, to provide
worthwhile and challenging opportunities to learn. The boys spoke of how it
provided opportunities to be seen as competent in something, and, dependent
upon their perception of competence, as such appeared to be sympathetic to
their understandable desire for achievable tasks. For some, this prospect meant
that PE was the only such time in their school day when they could achieve
successes that were comparable with their peers. Tannehill (2009)
acknowledged that children and young people find opportunities to be
successful through programmes that reflect their own desires and needs. It has
also been recognised that some educational policies may privilege and
marginalise particular knowledge and skills (Macdonald and Hunter, 2005). The
nature of other curriculum subjects, which were perceived as privileging only
213
academic attributes, potentially marginalised some of the academic and
behavioural traits of the boys in this study. In contrast, elements of PE were on
occasion deemed by participants as being more accessible and well suited to
their strengths and needs.
The varying nature of responses from both between each case study
participant, and from within each case itself, has demonstrated that PE
provokes complex and changeable reactions that appear to be a product of a
number of factors. It has been shown that boys with SEBD had varying
reactions to participation in the subject. These polemic experiences ranged
from, for example, a positive cathartic type remedial response, to examples of
aggressive reactions that were explained as being incited by virtue of the
physicality of the subject. The nature of these varying reactions, and the
specificities of the factors that each participant deemed as being contributory to
their experience of PE, are potentially issues that have relatively unique
resonance to those who are deemed to have SEBD.
The changeable and complex nature of the boys‟ experiences meant that,
notwithstanding the aforementioned positive elements of PE, relative to other
subjects, their time in PE also included some notable difficulties. There was not
a linear relationship between participation, and a therapeutic type response.
The participants spoke on a regular basis about occasions in which they
struggled to access the potential benefits of PE. Participation instead
sometimes appeared to accentuate the difficulties that they had in maintaining
appropriate behaviours. The outcomes of such difficulties occasionally created
a hierarchy within their class, which affected the peer relationships upon which
that they each placed such a high regard. These difficulties had observable
consequences within each of their classes, in regards to both a social
implication, as well as the effects that it had on their learning. As such, the
participants‟ relationship with PE was not always the simplistic affiliation that
some boys initially spoke of.
214
Despite these sometimes unsettling effects of participation, this study has
shown that PE should be seen as a key aspect of the educational provision of
those with SEBD for, in the opinions of the boys, it has the capability to
contribute much to their programme of study. Their experiences highlight the
perception that PE afforded opportunities for space and freedom that,
irrespective of a personalised learning agenda, would not be possible
elsewhere within the school day. However, there appears to be a lack of
synergy between the theoretical and desired outcomes of PE, according to the
National Curriculum, and those which the participants cited as being important
to them. In practice, the formal learning benefits of PE appeared to be limited by
the participants‟ desires for the informal supplementary processes of
participation.
Most often, the experiences that the boys chose to speak of highlighted the
ancillary aspects of PE, which are an aside to the fundamental aims of the
subject. Broadly speaking, for each of the case studies in this thesis, their time
in PE appeared to be a respite from more formal learning environments. Many
of the core reasons for PE‟s justification as a curriculum subject were spoken of
only briefly in the perceptions of the boys. Rather than being recognised as an
opportunity to learn through the physical domain, the participants in this study
instead gave a greater weight to the secondary processes of socialising, for
example. The reasons behind such experiences have been discussed in
chapter six as primarily being socially constructed forms of knowledge, which
have emerged as a result of their personal experiences of PE.
Smith and Parr (2007) have spoken of the „complexities involved both in the
ways in which young people‟s views are socially constructed, and the manner in
which they are articulated‟ (p.54). In this study, it appeared that the social
construction of participants‟ perceptions was a result of the unspoken
discourses that existed within their experiences of the subject. Moreover, the
participants showed only a relatively narrow view of these discourses. This
could be a methodological issue, as detailed below. It could also be seen as a
215
result of the „diet‟ that they were served by their experience of PE; in terms of
the provisions and variation within the localised interpretation of the NCPE.
Hence, it could be questioned as to whether their needs and expectations were
being met by the provision within the curriculum and syllabi of their schools.
Irrespective of their physical abilities in meeting this agenda, the potential of PE
to offer much more than a foundation for physical mastery, in the eyes of
children and young people with SEBD, seemed diluted as a result.
Talking with the boys invariably underlined a number of relative certainties that
contributed to how they defined their time in school. If their understanding of the
subject is appropriately acknowledged, then there appears to be the need to re-
conceive the place of PE in their schooling. At the heart of their experiences
were beliefs that PE included times that were greatly different from anything
else that they were subject to from the National Curriculum. Prominent in their
explanation of this interpretation was recognition of the freedoms that
participation through the physical, in an environment of open spaces, gave
them. It was apparent that participation in PE offered a time, which gave respite
from the perceived challenges of enclosed learning environments and from the
formal processes of learning in a static way.
Whilst it might not be seen to be the most thought provoking or politically correct
argument in the worth of physical education, the data from this study suggest
that there was real weight in the purity of it being a subject without similar
demands of others. Despite the many policy documents and items of previous
research that „speak‟ widely about the benefits of PE, in the eyes of the
participants, a major part of its role in their schooling was as an escape from the
rigour of other classroom environments. The data offered synergy in relation to
the conclusions of Williams (1996), who described how „while enjoyment may
not be a primary aim of the physical education curriculum, it may certainly be
claimed to be a significant factor affecting pupil learning‟ (p.31). As such, there
seemed to be an element of juxtaposition between the needs and desires of the
boys, and the merit of PE; more so than in the processes of many of their other
216
curriculum subjects. In real terms, it could be assumed that active engagement
in PE complimented their attitudes and behaviours in other subjects.
In the short term, when not exaggerating their negative behaviour traits through
the many opportunities to seek attention or even redemption, participation in PE
appeared to aid in the development of their social and co-operative skills. In the
longer term, it could be assumed that the physicality of the subject also helped
in the development of their fundamental movement skills and hand to eye co-
ordination. Consequently, it is possible to contend that it has a place in the
wider development of their learning elsewhere in the curriculum. It could
thereafter be reasoned that there is the need for a greater recognition of its
place within a curriculum that is built around the needs and desires of children
and young people with SEBD.
It is prudent to acknowledge that the conclusions of this study are influenced by
the choice of methods; each of which is discussed briefly below.
7.1 Reflections on Methodology and Method
The research design chosen for this study inevitably had an effect upon the
data that has been presented. It was an aim of this thesis to assess the
methodological issues that contribute to these effects. The impact of a
naturalistic design, upon the interactions that were had with each case study,
resulted in data which reflected the shared experiences of co-participation. The
contextualised nature of responses given in chapter five, has demonstrated the
socially constructed language that describes these individualised experiences.
As has been mentioned on a number of occasions in this thesis, it was not an
aim of this study to generalise the experiences of a small collection of case
studies to the wider population of students of this kind. It is also important to
remember the very real difficulties, which these children face, and have faced
for many years. According to their schools, each had a long history of
challenging behaviours, and almost all came from disrupted family
217
environments. Not only were their circumstances complex and many, but they
were also highly personal. Subsequently, their experiences are not portrayed as
being representative of the wider heterogeneous population of students, nor
were they intended to be seen as such.
With regard to their difficulties, the depth of data, as has been demonstrated in
chapter five, would have been neither possible nor in fact meaningful, if it were
not for the amount of time spent with the case study participants. It was
noticeable that, over time, their ability to verbalise their experiences became
more developed. The issue for this study was about accessing these
experiences in a way that took great care to ensure that their responses were
understood and interpreted according to the context in which they were
situated. As has been discussed in chapter three as being an expectation of the
data, what have been evidenced in the case studies of this research are
experiences, which are constructed socially and over time. Groves and Laws
(2000) cite their interpretation that the complexities of actions, and reactions, of
peers and teachers, influence the child‟s response both behaviourally and
mentally, during the physical education lesson and on reflection of it. The
perceptions cited by participants in chapter five will have, as such, been
conditioned prior to, and during, my involvement in their school. Studies that fail
to account for the development of interpretations over time, and the
environments in which they are spoken, negate to understand that these
interpretations are situated within the unique contexts of their being.
Kelly and Norwich (2004) have highlighted evidence that, more so than pupils in
primary schools, secondary school age pupils with moderate learning difficulties
tended to minimise their difficulties when asked of their perceptions of self.
Without a comparison to a testimony from others, it is difficult to say whether the
children and young people with SEBD in this study conformed to such an
analysis of those with learning difficulties. What is possible to assert here,
through the evidence of experiences cited, is that the openness of the
participants has provided the opportunity for a depth of interpretation that would
218
not have been possible within a positivist methodology. It is my interpretation
that the stories they chose to share were not evidence of a minimisation of their
difficulties. The majority of participants were forthright about their experiences in
PE. Indeed, the design and methods which were developed in this study,
allowed for these candid and sincere responses.
As a result of the choice of an interpretivist case study design, I occupied their
space in lessons, and began to earn opportunities to communicate with them
outside of their class. The time spent with participants, and the behaviours that I
myself chose to engage in, helped in some way to counter the stoicism which
pervaded the initial difficulties that the majority of participants had in verbalising
their perceptions. The reasons for their perceptions were not an esoteric
domain; they simply required methods that provided for appropriate
opportunities to access this privileged knowledge.
During the process of becoming familiar with each other‟s acquaintance, there
were occasions that did not feel to mean anything to me at the time. In reality
there were times with many of the participants when it was clear that they were
testing my staying power. In retrospect, it was these innocuous interactions that
meant everything to the development of a relationship that was the foundation
of our more meaningful discussions. On reflection, I had to earn their trust. That
is not to say that, after these times of localised sensitisation, the reactions
participants gave to me were at all disingenuous. However, I would contend that
there may well have been an element of insincerity if I had not taken the time to
go through this process.
The outcomes of this engagement were aided by both the study, and use, of
PE. As well as being the matter of inquiry of this study, the subject was itself
also a route into the essence of their experiences. Physical education was a
way of accessing the contexts that framed their perceptions. By assuming a role
and finding my place in their class, I experienced exceptional personal learning
curves that were only possible through shared experiences. This learning came
219
primarily through the privileged dynamics of co-participation in games, together
with my ability to advise, coach, and encourage the class. The ability to interact
and converse through such engagement facilitated communication on a number
of levels. Game-related discussions, jovial, and passing comments that add the
context to their experiences, would have been lost without this time
commitment. The ability to access meaningful thoughts on both a colloquial and
conversational level, as well as in the formal interview sessions, would not have
been possible if, instead, a methodological decision had been taken to fly in for
interviews, and fly out, per se.
As these accounts have been the product of a long term process of
engagement, what it has given in this thesis is a depth of understanding of how
six unique boys experienced their time in PE. There were a number of benefits
accrued from the high level of engagement within participants‟ school lives.
These were born through the trust that grows within commitment, and that is
cemented, as a result, over time. Such a depth of commitment has been the
foundation for the data of their experiences.
Despite these positives, there were challenges that came with such a level of
immersion and familiarity. The first of these was the synthesis of different roles
in school, and the assumptions that both staff and students made as a result of
my presence in their class. Importantly, how I was initially seen, as a researcher
and visitor to the school, in the eyes of the participants, was of key concern. It
took time for the initial representations of my being in their class, to be
countered by my actual role in their lessons. The consistency of my
engagement and immersion in class were a seminal aspect of the
implementation of methods. The actual strategies, through which the methods
of this study were delivered, were informed by these concepts. Methods were
completed in ways that did not disrupt the equilibrium of the learning
environment. Research diary entries and interaction (field) notes were made out
of sight of pupils. These sources of information were vital in the interpretation of
the participants‟ experiences. Despite the usefulness of these sources, the
220
interviews with each participant remained the cornerstone of this thesis and,
irrespective of the number that took place, the quantity of effort that it took to
make them possible was a key factor of their success.
The interviews only started after a period of sensitisation, and once my position
in school was secure and understood by pupils. The interviews took place over
a short period of time, to suit both the participants and their timetables. The
discussions were, in the main, led by the participants. Where the content of our
interviews was guided by the author, this was done so in relation to experiences
and observations made within lessons. This meant that the things we spoke
about were of significance to each participant, rather than being prescribed in a
formal way.
Interviews were a challenge to the boys in this study. They were not all used to
speaking one on one for even this relatively short space of time. Some
struggled with their attention span, and most spoke off task about other aspects
of their lives that held importance to them. To aid in the lessening of these
difficulties, the concept of photo elicitation was employed with each participant
towards the end of their series of interviews. The photographs themselves were
not analysed by their content. Indeed the participants seemed to put little
thought into the composition or content of them. Instead, as intended, they
acted purely as mediating artefacts between the participant and researcher. As
well as keeping the discussion on task, they appeared to help maintain a level
of conversation during the final week, through illuminating some of the
contextual reasons behind participants‟ experiences. On occasions where the
boys had previously found difficulty in verbalising certain aspects of their
understanding of PE, by re-visiting them with the help of photographs that they
had taken, they were able to have another go at making sense of the
antecedents to their experiences.
221
7.2 Study Limitations
In the wider study of the experiences of children and young people, there are
methodological hurdles that need still to be met. These are compounded more
so when faced by the additional challenges of researching SEBD. There were
as such shortcomings within this study that were, in the main, a product of these
challenges. Despite being lessened by the methodology and methods chosen,
these limitations were demonstrable in the data, and are indicative of the
challenges faced in the study of school experiences.
Aside to the methodological challenges that are commonly seen, the data of this
study have also been affected by a number of conscious decisions in the
planning of the research design. The gender bias that was evident through the
sampling in this study was a result of one such decision, the justifiable reasons
for which have been cited previously. Adopting of this approach has impeded
the ability to discuss matters that were of relevance to girls with SEBD. It could
be contended that many of the issues of importance in this study, of physicality
and performance for instance, were potentially highly gendered matters that
were specific to the experiences of boys. It could be supposed that the gender
differences inherent in the wider population of SEBD (Maras and Cooper, 1999)
would affect the prevalence of such experiences, if a balance of genders had
been sampled. The effect of this sampling upon the outcomes of the study, are
of interest to future engagement within this research agenda.
The sampling of boys was one example of actions in this study that most often
involved a process of prolonged yet covert discussions with staff in each school.
In being an outsider to the schools involved in this study, there was the rational
need for staff to act as intermediaries who could be „gatekeepers‟ in this
situation. This situation was an unavoidable consequence of working so closely
with schools, and led to ongoing dialogue with the teachers of each case study
participant. Irrespective of the inevitable nature of these conversations, the
effect it had upon the relations in class remains unknown. Despite working hard,
over time, to minimise any sense of coercion that participants might have
222
perceived between myself and staff, it would be wrong to ignore the possible
effect that this might have had. There is, however, nothing in the data set of any
case study to cause concern that the participants‟ responses were affected by
this initial process.
In addition to these anxieties of process in terms of both sampling and
„gatekeepers‟, there remains the concern that within the confines of this and
many other studies, children and young people of this age range were not
always able to show an appreciation of the bigger picture of PE. Previously,
students of this kind have been considered to provide only impressionistic
responses, which were often unsupported by specific examples (Garner, 1993).
Jones and Cheetham (2001) shared similar concerns in their conclusion that
„the relevancy of many of the activities taught are not grasped by students, as
they derive little personal meaning from them‟ (p. 96). Despite an element of
short-sightedness at times, which has resulted in some instances of similar
such difficulties, the sense of understanding that has been gained through the
depth of this study is again testament to the methodological challenges face by
this work.
The difficulties faced in verbalising their broader understanding of PE, are in
addition to (and potentially magnified by) the behavioural characteristics of
those with SEBD. These traits meant the decision that was taken to minimise
the duration of interviews, to better suit the problems that they sometimes faced
in maintaining concentration over a sustained period of time, potentially affected
the depth of responses that were possible. A couple of participants had
unswerving and thoughtful knowledge of the subject, which were appreciative of
the co-variations that emerged through context. As with the findings of Nugent
and Faucette (1995), others had difficulties in verbalising their opinions in a
consistent way. Their inability to creatively verbalise their perceptions was at
times a challenge to their understanding of PE, and was appreciative of the
changeable nature of their experiences.
223
The intrinsic physicality of the subject meant that, at times, it appeared as
though the boys only had an understanding of their experiences at an embodied
level. Despite offering various physical reasons to legitimate the ways in which
they participated in PE, they gave varying and sometimes confused
explanations of the thought processes that accompanied their actual
behaviours. They often found difficulty in verbalising and articulating their
primarily physical understanding of what it was to participate in PE. Participants
often gave thoughtful yet relatively immediate answers that were influenced
heavily by their most recent of lessons. In this regard it is worth mentioning that,
as discussed previously, and as has been found elsewhere (Groves and Laws,
2003), children and young people have a tendency to refer in the first instance
to only the most recent past, when formulating their perceptions of experience.
This issue was seemingly minimised through a continual process of weekly
interviews, which looked to question the potentially fragile responses of the
previous week. However, the discrepancies between weeks still remained, and,
consequently, their abstract accounts cannot be taken as a complete historical
picture of their experiences.
This sense of historical context was also an issue in the categorisation of need
that was made by staff in the participants‟ different schools. It was impossible to
compare the judgements of staff in different schools, between different case
studies. It was difficult, within the confines of this study, to either corroborate or
question the localised appraisals of each participant that were given by their
schools; and this is recognised as a possible weakness in the data of this study.
The professionals who made judgements about each of the boys did so often
after years of knowing the boys. Where the schools deemed participants
difficulties to be representative of certain conditions, rightly or wrongly, these
were taken as reality. These issues did not manifest in any level of seriousness
as to question the sampling in this study. As such, whether or not they complied
with my own interpretation was not an immediate concern. It was deemed
inappropriate for me to question and compare the decisions of staff with my own
interpretations, in relation to the participants‟ own perceptions that come
224
through the descriptions that they gave of their experiences. What their
perceptions and my interpretations have done is to shed light upon how their
difficulties manifest in physical education. There would be merit in furthering this
process of comparison with regard to how differently these children and young
people with SEBD behaved during PE, when compared with the assessments
made by others in more formal learning environments.
Further to the potential variations in staff perceptions of individual need, the
broader rhetoric of the NCPE was also inevitably refracted by localised
perceptions of its content. Many of the factors discussed in the previous chapter
are seen as highly contextualised examples that are situated within localised
variations of the NCPE. Although the implementation of each schools‟
curriculum was not the concern of this study, the potential impact of the
inconsistencies in the physical education provision in each school is worthy of
brief recognition, with regard to its relationship to the experiences of the
participants in this study. Garner (1993) speaks of how „aspects of the school‟s
organisation of the curriculum may play a part in the formulation of their
(students) perceptions about their learning activities‟ (p.411). In practical terms,
this matter is somewhat complicated, in that the time spent with the boys during
this study was split between two different schools, at two different times of the
school calendar year. With each school, therefore, naturally differing in their
application of the curriculum, the PE experiences at the time of data collection
differed between cases. As such, reactions to these processes were highly
changeable in nature.
The discussions held at the beginning and end of my time with each participant
were, to an extent, conducive to making some comparisons between the
different interpretations of the National Curriculum. However, the choices that
each school made, to interpret the curriculum in different ways, led to inevitable
differences in the makeup of each participant‟s timetable. The consequences of
the variable nature of content within PE lessons were coupled with the equally
varying responses of each participant to their lessons, as have been described
225
at length in chapter five. The somewhat narrowly defined views that participants
portrayed of their curricula in this study appeared to be, in part, a product of the
specific time spent in each school.
Underpinning these limitations are the issues of representation that run through
qualitative work of this kind. It is acknowledged that the interpretations made
regarding the experiences of the participants were constructed as a result of
both the observation of shared experiences, and the language that they used
within our interviews together. It is noteworthy to remember that, as has been
more appropriately discussed in chapter three of this thesis, „language is a
constitutive force that creates a particular view of reality‟ (Sparkes, 1995,
p.159). Despite attempts made throughout this thesis to be explicit as to the
origins of the interpretations of such language, it would be wrong to assume that
they would be shared unanimously, if others were to assess the texts in the
same way. The interpretations were in fact also a result of a particular view of
reality. Despite such realities being the cornerstone of interpretivist work, the
limitations that it places upon the outcomes of this study are worthy of
acknowledgement.
The subtleties of language and meaning, which came from the intuitive
responses of participants, were a product of their historical experiences of PE.
As a result of these unique and personal realities, and despite the prolonged
engagement with each individual, their experiences remain to be bound by the
context in which they were spoken. As Smith et al (2007) contend, „it is the
interplay between the commonalities across schools and the participants within
them that need to be examined more adequately in order to fully understand
what young people experience in the name of NCPE‟ (p.189).
The challenges of this research have centred upon being able to discuss the
commonalities and differences between the case studies contained in this
thesis. These case studies have emerged from a number of different schools,
which each had varying approaches to the teaching of physical education. As
226
has been mentioned previously, it was not within the remit of this research to
question these irregular interpretations of the NCPE. However, as a result of
these changing contexts, the particular interactions between PE and participant
are both highly personal and unpredictable. In spite of the important lessons
that have been derived from individual stories of PE, to make meaningful
comparisons between them all, „in order to fully understand what young people
experience in the name of NCPE‟ (Smith et al., 2007, p.189), has been a
challenge.
7.3 Future Research
The limitations of this study centre upon the highly contextualised nature of the
data, and the common difficulties faced when discussing the lived experiences
of others in an interpretivist sense. It will never be an aim of research such as
this to generalise the idiosyncrasies of case study outcomes, to the wider
population. However, this thesis makes a number of noteworthy contributions to
the understanding of how children and young people experience PE. Moreover,
the focus that was placed upon participants who were deemed to have SEBD
has highlighted the significant gap in our awareness of how they, in particular,
have a relatively unique response to physical education. Consequently, and as
a result of these diversities, this study has highlighted a potentially important
connection between the additional needs of children and young people with
SEBD, and the naturally occurring effects that can be seen through participation
in NCPE.
Despite the contribution to this field that the present study makes, there are
questions that still remain to be answered, and it is apparent that there is the
need for further investigation into the noteworthy issues that have come out of
this study. For these outcomes to be further progressed, there is the need for a
greater understanding of the reasons behind how their experiences in PE affect
the children and young people thereafter. There is the need to continue to work
alongside children and young people, in a way as to further understand the
relationships between their challenging behaviours and their educational and
227
sporting experiences. This can only be done by developing ways in which we
can understand the reasons behind their experiences, and thus theorising the
socio-cultural foundations of their perceptions in PE, through inventive and
participatory methods.
In order to achieve these aims, there is the need for PE research to engage
more widely with contemporary methodological discourses in the social
sciences. The reasons behind the diverse responses cited in this study now
need to be analysed further, making use of innovative methodologies, to include
research that examines the relationship between these multi-faceted responses.
The importance of these methodological matters is further compounded when
the population in question holds such varied characteristics as do those
deemed to have SEBD. Without adopting a positivist cause/effect design that
has been the weakness of many of the reviewed articles in this thesis, there
appears the need to develop frameworks from within which the historical
context of pupils‟ experiences can be further studied. Frameworks that are
starting to be used more widely in this regard, for instance the use of a task-
based approach (Fitzgerald et al., 2003a), the application of timelines (Enright,
2009; Enright and O'Sullivan, 2010) and the proliferation of research diaries
(Groves and Laws, 2003), are not always well suited to the study of adolescents
with SEBD.
This research agenda must also now expand, to further problematise
ethnographic and visual methods used in the study of school experiences, in
the context of PE. It appears that work such as Fitzgerald‟s (2007) use of drama
as a research method has done much to both develop the methodological
innovations in physical education research, and also bridge the divide between
research into physical education, and the innovative work of the wider social
science community. It could be contended that this is ready to be taken further,
to include the work of multi-modal studies in the social sciences that, for
example, allow for greater inclusion of the senses (Ross, Holland, Renold and
Hillman, 2008) and media (Coffey, Renold, Dicks, Soyinka and Mason, 2006;
228
Dicks, Soyinka and Coffey, 2006) in explaining the lived experiences of
participants. In doing so would both give a greater understanding of the wider
picture, in regards to how adolescents experience education, but, also, it would
be conducive to the need for a greater range of participatory methods that hold
suit for the study of how children and young people with SEBD experience PE.
In mind of the potential for this research to develop in ways as given above, it is
prudent to conclude that these developments can now take place within the
context of the lessons learned from this study. This study has furthered our
understanding of a marginalised group of young people. It has built upon the
foundations of more popularised research agendas, within physical education
and student voice, to document the lived experiences of case study participants
who are often forgotten in comparison to those with a physical SEN.
Consequently, this study has shown how children and young people with SEBD
experience PE in a way that is often manifestly different to that more commonly
reported. The matters of significance cited by participants centred upon
opportunities to actively engage in a practical subject. The apparent complex
relationship between those deemed to experience SEBD, and participation in
physical education, seemed to be a product of such practicality. Children and
young people who were characterised as experiencing SEBD appeared to
share common perceptions of such level of pro-activity. However, despite such
commonalities, their experiences also highlighted the inherent variance in
localised interpretations of the curriculum. The participants have demonstrated
that, if their perceptions are to be recognised aside to those of other studies,
then a greater weight should be given to their situated responses.
This research has recognised that, when studying the lives of children and
young people deemed to have SEBD, their experiences in PE are worthy of
distinction aside to those more commonly given. The case studies of this thesis
have further emphasised that perceptions of PE are circumscribed by an
individual‟s past experiences and, consequently, participation has a number of
229
contrasting effects. These effects cannot be delineated by label, location,
pedagogy or activity. The extremes of the participants‟ behaviours were seen to
be a product of an emotive response to the collective opportunities which
physical education presents. As such, the dissimilarities inherent in the
particular details of participants‟ experiences attest to both the variance of
difficulties which are ascribed to characterise SEBD, as well as the dynamic
nature of participation in PE. Physical educationalists should consider such
variance, and the subsequent inconsistencies in their pupils‟ experiences, to be
a matter of the individualities which define social, emotional and behavioural
difficulties.
230
References
'John' & Cooper, P. (2006). Understanding SEBD from the inside: The importance of listening to young people. In: Hunter-Carsch, M., Tiknaz, Y., Cooper, P. & Sage, R. (eds.) The Handbook of Social, Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties. London, Continuum, pp. 17-23.
Abrahams, R. D. (1986). Ordinary and extraordinary experience. In: Turner, V. W. & Bruner, E. M. (eds.) The Anthropology of Experience. Urbana, University of Illinois Press, pp. 45-72.
Ainscow, M. & Cesar, M. (2006). Inclusive education ten years after Salamanca: Setting the agenda. European Journal of Psychology in Education, 21 (3), 231-238.
Amis, J. (2005). Interviewing for case study research. In: Andrews, D. L., Mason, D. S. & Silk, M. L. (eds.) Qualitative Methods in Sports Studies. Oxford, Berg, pp. 104-138.
Arnot, M. & Reay, D. (2007). A sociology of pedagogic voice: power, inequality and pupil consultation. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 28 (3), 311-325.
Ashton, R. (2008). Improving the transfer to secondary school: how every child's voice can matter. Support for Learning, 23 (4), 176-182.
Ayers, H., Clarke, D. & Murray, A. (2000). Perspectives on Behaviour: a Practical Guide to Effective Interventions for Teachers. London, David Fulton.
Ayers, H. & Prytys, C. (2002). An A to Z Practical Guide to Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties. London, David Fulton Publishers.
Azzarito, L. (2009). The panopticon of physical education: pretty, active and ideally white. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 14 (1), 19-39.
Azzarito, L. & Ennis, C. D. (2003). A sense of connection: toward social constructivist physical education. Sport, Education and Society, 8 (2), 179-198.
Bagnoli, A. (2009). Beyond the standard interview: The use of graphic elicitation and arts-based methods. NCRM Working Paper. Realities, Morgan Centre, Manchester, UK
Bailey, R. (2006). Physical education and sport in schools: a review of benefits and outcomes. Journal of School Health, 76 (8), 397-401.
Bailey, R., Armour, K. M., Kirk, D., Jess, M., Pickup, I., Sandford, R. A. & the BERA Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy Special Interest Group (2008). The educational benefits claimed for physical education and school sport: an academic review. Research Papers in Education, iFirst Article 1-26.
231
Bailey, R. & Dismore, H. (2004). SpinEd The role of physical education and sport in education; Project Report. 4th International conference of ministers and senior officials responsible for physical education and sport (MINEPS IV), Athens, Greece.
Berg, B. L. (2007). Qualitative Research Methods for the Social Sciences (Sixth Edition). Boston, Allyn and Bacon.
Bernstein, B. (1993). Foreward. In: Daniels, H. (ed.) Charting the Agenda: Educational Activity After Vygotsky. London, Routledge, pp. xiii-xxiii.
Bertone, S., Meard, J., Flavier, E., Euzet, J. P. & Durand, M. (2002). Undisciplined actions and teacher-student transactions during two physical education lessons. European Physical Education Review, 8 (2), 99-117.
Biddle, S. J. H. & Mutrie, N. (2008). Psychology of Physical Activity: determinants, well-being and interventions. London, Routledge.
Blaikie, N. (1993). Approaches to Social Enquiry. Cambridge, Polity Press.
Blinde, M. E. & McCallister, S. G. (1998). Listening to the voices of students with disabilities. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance, 69 (6), 64-68.
Bloor, M., Frankland, J., Thomas, M. & Robson, K. (2001). Focus Groups in Social Research. London, Sage.
Bott, C., Farmer, R. & Rohde, J. (1997). Behaviour problems associated with lack of speech in people with learning difficulties. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 41 (1), 3-7.
British Educational Research Association (2004). Revised Ethical Guidelines for Educational Research. Nottingham, British Educational Research Association.
British Psychological Society (2006). Code of Ethics and Conduct. Leicester, British Psychological Society.
Brooks, M. G. & Brooks, J. G. (2004). The courage to be constructivist. In: Canestrari, A. S. & Marlowe, B. A. (eds.) Educational Foundations: An Anthology of Critical Readings. California, Sage, pp. 184-194.
Burton, D. (2000). The use of case studies in social science research. In: Burton, D. (ed.) Research Training for Social Scientists. London, Sage, pp. 215-225.
Butler, R. (1999). Information seeking and achievement motivation in middle childhood and adolescence. Developmental Psychology, 35 (1), 146-163.
232
Capel, S., Hayes, S., Katene, W. & Velija, P. (2009). The development of knowledge for teaching physical education in secondary schools over the course of a PGCE year. European Journal of Teacher Education, 32 (1), 51-62.
Carlisle, R. (1974). Physical education and aesthetics. In: Whiting, H. T. A. & Masterson, D. W. (eds.) Readings in the Aesthetics of Sport. London, Lepus Books, pp. 21-31.
Carlson, T. B. (1995). We hate gym: student alienation from physical education. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 14 (4), 467-477.
Carlson, T. B. & Hastie, P. (1997). The student social system within sport education. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 16 (4), 176-195.
Charmaz, K. (2005). Grounded theory in the 21st century; applications for advancing social justice studies. In: Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. S. (eds.) The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research (Third Edition). California, Sage, pp. 507-535.
Clough, P. & Nutbrown, C. (2007). A Student's Guide to Methodology (Second Edition). London, Sage.
Coakley, J. (2007). Sports in Society; Issues and Controversies (Ninth Edition). New York, McGraw-Hill.
Coates, J. & Vickerman, P. (2008). Let the children have their say: a review of children with special educational needs experiences of physical education. Support for Learning, 23 (4), 168-175.
Coffey, A., Renold, E., Dicks, B., Soyinka, B. & Mason, B. (2006). Hypermedia ethnography in educational settings: possibilities and challenges. Ethnography and Education, 1 (1), 15-30.
Coffield, F. C., Moseley, D. V. M., Hall, E. & Ecclestone, K. (2004). Should we be using learning styles? What research has to say to practice. London, Learning and Skills Research Centre
Cohen, L., Manion, L. & Morrison, K. (2000). Research Methods in Education (Fifth Edition). Oxon, RoutledgeFalmer.
Cole, T., Daniels, H. & Visser, J. (2003). Patterns of Provision for pupils with behavioural difficulties in England; a study of government statistics and behaviour support plan data. Oxford Review of Education, 29 (2), 187-205.
Cole, T. & Visser, J. (1998). How should the 'effectiveness' of schools for pupils with EBD be assessed? Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties, 3 (1), 37-43.
Cole, T., Visser, J. & Daniels, H. (1999). A model explaining effective EBD practice in mainstream schools. Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties, 4 (1), 12-18.
233
Cooper, P. (1999a). Changing perceptions of EBD: maladjustment, EBD and beyond. Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties, 4 (1), 3-11.
Cooper, P. (1999b). Educating children with emotional and behavioural difficulties; The evolution of current thinking and provision. In: Cooper, P. (ed.) Understanding and Supporting Children with Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties. London, Jessica Kingsley, pp. 13-42.
Cooper, P. (1999c). Emotional and behavioural difficulties and adolescence. In: Cooper, P. (ed.) Understanding and Supporting Chldren with Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties. London, Jessica Kingsley, pp. 43-56.
Cooper, P. (1999d). Introduction: What do we mean by emotional and behavioural difficulties? In: Cooper, P. (ed.) Understanding and Supporting Children with Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties. London, Jessica Kingsley, pp. 9-13.
Cooper, P. (2006). Setting the scene. In: Hunter-Carsch, M., Tiknaz, Y., Cooper, P. & Sage, R. (eds.) The Handbook of Social, Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties. London, Continuum, pp. 1-14.
Cooper, P. & Shea, T. (1998). Pupils perceptions of AD/HD. Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties, 3 (3), 36-48.
Costley, D. (2000). Collecting the views of young people with moderate learning difficulties. In: Lewis, A. & Lindsay, G. (eds.) Researching Children's Perspectives. Buckingham, Open University Press, pp. 163-172.
Cothran, D. & Ennis, C. D. (1998). Curricula of mutual worth: comparisons of students' and teachers' curricular goals. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 17 (3), 307-326.
Cothran, D., Kulinna, P. H. & Garrahy, D. A. (2009). Attributions for and consequences of student misbehaviour. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 14 (2), 155-167.
Crotty, M. (1998). The Foundations of Social Research; Meaning and Perspective in the Research Process. London, Sage.
Curtner-Smith, M. (2002). Methodological issues in research. In: Laker, A. (ed.) The Sociology of Sport and Physical Education; an Introductory Reader. London, RoutledgeFalmer, pp. 36-57.
Dagkas, S. & Stathi, A. (2007). Exploring social and environmental factors affecting adolescents' participation in physical activity. European Physical Education Review, 13 (3), 369-384.
Daniels, H. (1996). Introduction: psychology in a social world. In: Daniels, H. (ed.) An Introduction to Vygotsky. London, Routledge, pp. 1-27.
234
Daniels, H. (2006). The 'social' in post-Vygotskian theory. Theory and Psychology, 16 (1), 37-49.
Daniels, H. & Cole, T. (2002). The development of provision for young people with emotional and behavioural difficulties: an activity theory analysis. Oxford Review of Education, 28 (2), 311-329.
Davies, T. (1996). Humanism. London, Routledge.
Davis, A. (1992). The right to life: the right to education. In: Fairbairn, G. & Fairbairn, S. (eds.) Integrating Special Children: Some Ethical Issues. Aldershot, Avebury, pp. 57-69.
Dean, C. (2007). Young travellers and the children's fund: some practical notes on an experimental image-based research project. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 7 (1), 16-22.
Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005a). Introduction: The discipline and practice of qualitative research. In: Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. S. (eds.) The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research (Third Edition). California, Sage, pp. 1-33.
Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005b). Preface. In: Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. S. (eds.) The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research (Third Edition). California, Sage, pp. ix-xix.
Department for Children Schools and Families. (2007). The Children's Plan; Building Brighter Futures. London, HMSO
Department for Children Schools and Families. (2008a). The Education of Children and Young People with Behavioural, Emotional and Social Difficulties as a Special Educational Need. London, HMSO
Department for Children Schools and Families. (2008b). Working Together: listening to the Voices of Children and Young People. London, HMSO
Department for Education and Employment. (1996). The Education Act. London, HMSO
Department for Education and Employment. (1997). Excellence for All Children: Meeting Special Educational Needs. London, HMSO
Department for Education and Employment/Department of Health (1994). Circular 9/94 The Education of Children with Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties. London, DfEE / DOH.
Department for Education and Employment/Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (1999). Physical Education; The National Curriculum for England. London, HMSO.
235
Department for Education and Skills. (2001a). Special Educational Needs and Disability Act. London, HMSO
Department for Education and Skills (2001b). Special Educational Needs: Code of Practice. London, HMSO.
Department for Education and Skills (2003). Every Child Matters. London, HMSO.
Department for Education and Skills (2005). Data Collection by Type of Special Educational Need. London, HMSO.
Department for Education and Skills (2006a). National Statistics First Release: Pupil Characteristics and class sizes in maintained schools in England. London, DfES / National Statistics.
Department for Education and Skills (2006b). National Statistics First Release: Special Educational Needs in England. London, DfES / National Statistics.
Department for Education and Skills (2006c). Special Educational Needs; Third Report of Session 2005-2006. London, HMSO.
Dicks, B., Soyinka, B. & Coffey, A. (2006). Multimodal Ethnography. Qualitative Research, 6 (1), 77-96.
Dillon, J., Morris, M., O'Donnell, L., Reid, A., Rickinson, M. & Scott, W. (2005). Engaging and Learning with the Outdoors – The Final Report of the Outdoor Classroom in a Rural Context Action Research Project. London, NfER
Dismore, H. (2008). Key Issues in Primary/Secondary Transition. Physical Education Matters, 3 (3), 30-31.
Dismore, H. & Bailey, R. (2010). „It‟s been a bit of a rocky start‟: attitudes toward physical education following transition. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 15 (2), unknown.
Doll-Tepper, G. (2005). The UK in the world of physical education. National Summit on Physical Education. London.
Don Morris, G. S. (2003). Social responsibility through physical activity. In: Laker, A. (ed.) The Future of Physical Education: Building a New Pedagogy. London, Routledge, pp. 54-81.
Dyson, B. P. (1995). Students voices in two alternative elementary physical education programs. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 14 (4), 394-407.
Economic and Social Research Council. (2006). Research Ethics Framework. Swindon, ESRC
236
Edwards, A. (2002). Responsible research: ways of being a researcher. British Educational Research Journal, 28 (2), 157-168.
Eldar, E. (2008). Educating through the physical - behavioural interpretation. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 13 (3), 215-229.
Elton, R. B. (1989). Discipline in schools : report of the Committee of Enquiry chaired by Lord Elton. London, HMSO
Enright, E. (2009). 'In the photos is who I am': student researchers reframing physical education research and practice. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy Special Interest Group New Researchers Seminar, Birmingham, UK.
Enright, E. & O'Sullivan, M. (2010). Carving a new order of experience‟ with young people in physical education: Participatory Action Research as a pedagogy of possibility. In: O'Sullivan, M. & MacPhail, A. (eds.) Young people‟s voices in physical education and youth sport. Abingdon, Routledge, pp. 163-185.
Estyn. (2009). Physical education for pupils with learning difficulties: Identifying good practice. Cardiff, Estyn
Etscheidt, M. A. & Ayllon, T. (1987). Contingent exercise to decrease hyperactivity. Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychotherapy, 4 (2), 192-198.
Evans, J. & Davies, B. (2002). Theoretical background. In: Laker, A. (ed.) The Sociology of Sport and Physical Education; An Introductory Reader. London, RoutledgeFalmer, pp. 15-35.
Evans, P. (1993). Some implications of Vygotsky's work for special education. In: Daniels, H. (ed.) Charting The Agenda: Educational Activity After Vygotsky. London, Routledge, pp. 30-45.
Evans, W. H., Evans, S. S., Schmid, R. E. & Pennypacker, H. S. (1985). The effects of exercise on selected classroom behaviors of behaviourally disordered adolescents. Behavioural Disorders, 11 42-51.
Fairclough, S. J. & Stratton, G. (2005). Physical education makes you fit and healthy: physical educations contribution to young peoples activity levels. Health Education Research, 20 (1), 14-23.
Farrell, P., Critchley, C. & Mills, C. (1999). The educational attainments of pupils with emotional and behavioural difficulties. British Journal of Special Education, 26 (1), 50-53.
Fernandez-Balboa, J. M. (1997). Physical education teacher preparation in the postmodern era: toward a critical pedagogy. In: Fernandez-Balboa, J. M. (ed.) Critical Postmodernism in Human Movement Physical Education and Sport. New York, State University of New York Press, pp. 121-138.
237
Fielding, M. (2004a). New wave student voice and the renewal of civic society. London Review of Education, 2 (3), 197-217.
Fielding, M. (2004b). Transformative approaches to student voice: theoretical underpinnings, recalcitrant realities. British Educational Research Journal, 30 (2), 295-311.
Fielding, M. (2007). Beyond "voice": new roles, relations, and contexts in researching with young people. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 28 (3), 301-310.
Fisher, R. J. (1996). A comparative study of teachers' and pupils' interpretations of physical education. Journal of Comparative Physical Education and Sport, 18 (2), 50-57.
Fitzgerald, H. (2005). Still feeling like a spare piece of luggage? Embodied experiences of (dis)ability in physical education and school sport. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 10 (1), 41-59.
Fitzgerald, H. (2006). Disability and physical education. In: Kirk, D., Macdonald, D. & O'Sullivan, M. (eds.) The Handbook of Physical Education. London, Sage, pp. 752-766.
Fitzgerald, H. (2007). Dramatizing physical education: using drama in research. British Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35 (4), 253-260.
Fitzgerald, H. & Jobling, A. (2004). Student-centred research; working with disabled students. In: Wright, J., Macdonald, D. & Burrows, L. (eds.) Critical inquiry and problem-solving in physical education. London, Routledge, pp. 74-92.
Fitzgerald, H., Jobling, A. & Kirk, D. (2003a). Listening to the 'voices' of students with severe learning difficulties through a task-based approach to research and learning in physical education. Support for Learning, 18 (3), 123-129.
Fitzgerald, H., Jobling, A. & Kirk, D. (2003b). Valuing the voices of young disabled people: exploring experience of physical education and sport. European Journal of Physical Education, 8 (2), 175-200.
Flavier, E., Bertone, S., Hauw, D. & Durand, M. (2002). The meaning and organisation of physical education teachers actions during conflict with students. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 22 (1), 20-38.
Fox, K. (2000). The effects of exercise on self-perceptions and self-esteem. In: Biddle, S. J. H., Fox, K. & Boutcher, S. H. (eds.) Physical Activity and Psychological Well-Being. London, Routledge, pp. 88-117.
Fox, P. & Avramidis, E. (2003). An evaluation of an outdoor education programme for students with emotional and behavioural difficulties. Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties, 8 (4), 267-283.
238
France, A., Bendelow, G. & Williams, S. (2000). A 'risky' business: researching the health benefits of children and young people. In: Lewis, A. & Lindsay, G. (eds.) Researching Children's Perspectives. Buckingham, Open University Press, pp. 150-161.
Frapwell, A. (2009). One small step for AfPE, one giant leap for physical education: A blue moon story. Physical Education Matters, 4 (1), 11-13.
Gallagher, T. M. (1999). Interrelationships among children's language, behaviour, and emotional problems. Topics in Language Disorders, 19 (2), 90-96.
Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in Ethnomethodology. New Jersey, Prentice-Hall.
Garner, P. (1993). What disruptive students say about the school curriculum and the way it is taught. Therapeutic Care and Education, 2 (2), 404-415.
Gergen, K. J. (2001). Social Construction in Context. London, Sage.
Glasby, T. & Macdonald, D. (2004). Negotiating the curriculum; challenging the social relationships in teaching. In: Wright, J., Macdonald, D. & Burrows, L. (eds.) Critical Inquiry and Problem-Solving in Physical Education. London, Routledge, pp. 133-144.
Glaser, B. G. & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago, Aldine Publishing Company.
Goodwin, D. L. & Watkinson, E. J. (2000). Inclusive physical education from the perspective of students with physical disabilities. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly, 17 (2), 144-160.
Goodwin, L. J. (2007). The inclusion of children with physical disabilities in physical education. PhD Thesis, University of Surrey.
Graham, G. (1995). Physical education through students' eyes and in students' voices: implications for teachers and researchers. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 14 (4), 478-482.
Gratton, C. & Jones, I. (2004). Research Methods for Sport Studies. Oxon, Routledge.
Gray, S., Sproule, J. & Wang, C. K. J. (2008). Pupils' perceptions of and experiences in team invasion games: A case study of a Scottish secondary school and its three feeder primary schools. European Physical Education Review, 14 (2), 179-201.
Green, J. L., Kelly, G. J., Castanheira, L., Esch, J., Frank, C., Hodel, M., Putney, L. & Rodarte, M. (1996). Conceptualising a basis for understanding: what differences do differences make? Educational Psychologist, 31 (3/4), 227-234.
239
Green, K. (2008). Physical education research in practice. BERA PESP SIG Seminar, University of Worcester, UK.
Greig, A. & Taylor, J. (1999). Doing Research with Children. London, Sage.
Groves, S. (1999). Children's experiences of national curriculum physical education: policy and practice. Scottish Journal of Physical Education, 27 (1), 10-18.
Groves, S. (2001). How children experience national curriculum physical education. PhD thesis, University of Southampton.
Groves, S. & Laws, C. (2000). Children's experiences of physical education. European Journal of Physical Education, 5 (1), 19-27.
Groves, S. & Laws, C. (2003). The use of narrative in accessing children's experiences in physical education. European Journal of Physical Education, 8 (2), 160-174.
Halliday, P. (1993). Physical education within special educational provision - equality and entitlement. In: Evans, J. (ed.) Equality, Education and Physical Education. London, The Falmer Press, pp. 205-216.
Halsey, K., Murfield, J., Harland, J. L. & Lord, P. (2006). The Voice of Young People: an Engine for Improvement? Scoping the Evidence. London, CfTB Education Trust
Haralambos, M. & Holborn, M. (1995). Sociology: Themes and Perspectives. London, HarperCollins.
Hastie, P. & Sharp, T. (1999). Effects of a sport education curriculum on the positive social behaviour of at-risk rural adolescent boys. Journal of Education for Students Placed At Risk, 4 (4), 417-430.
Hastie, P. & Siedentop, D. (1999). An ecological perspective on physical education. European Physical Education Review, 5 (1), 9-29.
Heneker, S. (2005). Speech and language therapy support for pupils with behavioural, emotional, and social difficulties (BESD) - a pilot project. British Journal of Special Education, 32 (2), 86-91.
Holdaway, S. (2000). Theory and method in qualitative research. In: Burton, D. (ed.) Research Training for Social Scientists. London, Sage, pp. 156-166.
Holstein, J. A. & Gubrium, J. F. (2005). Interpretive practice and social action. In: Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. S. (eds.) The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research: Third Edition. London, Sage, pp. 483-506.
240
Houghton, S., Wheldall, K. & Merrett, F. (1988). Classroom behaviour problems which secondary school teachers say they find most troublesome. British Educational Research Journal, 14 (3), 297-312.
Houlihan, B. & Green, M. (2006). The changing status of school sport and physical education: explaining policy change. Sport, Education and Society, 11 (1), 73-92.
Hundiede, K. (1985). The tacit backgrounds of children's judgements. In: Wertsch, J. (ed.) Culture, Communication and Cognition: Vygotskian Perspectives. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, pp. 306-322.
Hunter-Carsch, M. (2006). Masks, manners, motivation and mind. In: Hunter-Carsch, M., Tiknaz, Y., Cooper, P. & Sage, R. (eds.) The Handbook of Social, Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties. London, Continuum, pp. 36-51.
Innes, M., Moss, T. & Smigiel, H. (2001). What do the children say? The importance of student voice. Research in Drama Education, 6 (2), 207-221.
Jackson, S. A. & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1999). Flow in Sports: The keys to optimal experiences and performances. Champaign, Illinois, Human Kinetics.
John-Steiner, V. & Souberman, E. (1978). Afterword. In: Cole, M., John-Steiner, V., Scribner, S. & Souberman, E. (eds.) L.S. Vygotsky: Mind in Society, the Development of Higher Psychological Processes. London, Harvard University Press, pp. 121-133.
Jones, R. & Cheetham, R. (2001). Physical education in the national curriculum: its purpose and meaning for final year secondary school students. European Journal of Physical Education, 6 (2), 81-100.
Jones, R. A. (2003). The construction of emotional and behavioural difficulties. Educational Psychology in Practice, 19 (2), 147-157.
Kamberelis, G. & Dimitriadis, G. (2005). Focus groups; strategic articulations of pedagogy, politics, and inquiry. In: Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. S. (eds.) The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research. Third ed. London, SAGE, pp. 887-907.
Kay, W. (1998). A case for clarifying the physical education rationale. Bulletin of Physical Education, 34 (3), 177-184.
Kay, W. (2003). Physical education R.I.P? British Journal of Teaching Physical Education, 34 (4), 6-9.
Kelly, N. & Norwich, B. (2004). Pupils' perceptions of self and of labels: Moderate learning difficulties in mainstream and special schools. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 74 (3), 411-435.
241
Kevan, F. (2003). Challenging behaviour and communication difficulties. British Journal of Learning Disabilities, 31 (2), 75-80.
Kirk, D. (1986). A critical pedagogy for teacher education: Towards an inquiry-orientated approach. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 5 (4), 230-246.
Kirk, D. (2004). Framing quality physical education: the elite sport model or sport education? Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 9 (2), 185-195.
Kitzinger, C. (2004). Feminist approaches. In: Seale, C., Gobo, G., Gubrium, J. F. & Silverman, D. (eds.) Qualitative Research Practice. London, Sage, pp. 125-140.
Kristen, L., Patriksson, G. & Fridlund, B. (2002). Conceptions of children and adolescents with physical disabilities about the participation in a sports programme. European Physical Education Review, 8 (2), 139-156.
Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1996). Practice, person, social world. In: Daniels, H. (ed.) Introduction to Vygotsky. London, Routledge, pp. 143-150.
Lawson, H. A. (1999). Education for social responsibility: preconditions in retrospect and prospect. Quest, 51 (2), 116-149.
Layder, D. (2006). Understanding Social Theory (Second Edition). London, Sage.
Leah, J. & Capel, S. (2000). Competition and co-operation in physical education. In: Capel, S. & Piotrowski, S. (eds.) Issues in Physical Education. Abingdon, RoutledgeFalmer, pp. 144-158.
LeCompte, M. & Preissle, J. (1993). Ethnography and Qualitative Design in Educational Research. London, Academic Press.
Lee, A. M., Carter, J. A. & Xiang, P. (1995). Children's conceptions of ability in physical education. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 14 (4), 384-393.
Lensmire, T. J. (1998). Rewriting student voice. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 30 (3), 261-291.
Lewis, A. (2002). Accessing, through research interviews, the views of children with difficulties in learning. Support for Learning, 17 (3), 110-116.
Lincoln, Y. S. & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Enquiry. California, Sage.
Lindsay, G. (2000). Researching children's perspectives: ethical issues. In: Lewis, A. & Lindsay, G. (eds.) Researching Children's Perspectives. Buckingham, Open University Press, pp. 3-19.
242
Lindsay, G. & Dockrell, J. (2000). The behaviour and self-esteem of children with specific speech and language difficulties. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 70 (4), 583-601.
Lord, P. & Jones, M. (2006). Pupils' experiences and perspectives of the national curriculum and assessment: final report for the research review. Slough: NfER.
Lowenhoff, C. (2004). Emotional and behavioural problems in children: the benefits of training professionals in primary care to identify relationships at risk. Work Based Learning in Primary Care, 2 (1), 18-25.
Luce, S. C., Delquadri, J. & Hall, R. V. (1980). Contingent exercise: a mild but powerful procedure for supressing inappropriate verbal and aggressive behaviour. Journal of Applied Behaviour Analysis, 13 (4), 583-594.
Lundy, L. (2007). 'Voice' is not enough: conceptualising Article 12 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. British Educational Research Journal, 33 (6), 927-942.
Macdonald, D. & Hunter, L. (2005). Lessons Learned.....About Curriculum: Five Years on and Half a World Away. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 24 (2), 111-126.
Macdonald, D., Kirk, D., Metzler, M., Nilges, L., Schempp, P. & Wright, J. (2002). It's all very well, in theory: theoretical perspectives and their applications in contemporary pedagogical research. Quest, 54 (2), 133-156.
Maras, P. & Cooper, P. (1999). Sex differences, gender issues and emotional and behavioural difficulties. In: Cooper, P. (ed.) Understanding and Supporting Children with Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties. London, Jessica Kingsley, pp. 57-71.
Marshall, C. & Rossman, G. (2006). Designing Qualitative Research. California, Sage.
Masson, J. (2000). Researching children's perspectives: legal issues. In: Lewis, A. & Lindsay, G. (eds.) Researching Children's Perspectives. Buckingham, Open University Press, pp. 34-45.
McEvoy, A. & Welker, R. (2000). Antisocial behavior, academic failure, and social climate: a critical review. Journal of Emotional and Behavioural Disorders, 8 (3), 130-140.
McNamee, M. (2005). The nature and values of physical education. In: Green, K. & Hardman, K. (eds.) Physical Education: Essential Issues. London, Sage, pp. 1-20.
McNamee, M., Olivier, S. & Wainwright, P. (2007). Research Ethics in Exercise, Health and Sports Sciences. Oxon, Routledge.
243
Medcalf, R., Marshall, J. J. & Rhoden, C. (2006). Exploring the relationship between physical education and enhancing behaviour in pupils with emotional behavioural difficulties. Support for Learning, 21 (4), 169-174.
Merrell, C. & Tymms, P. B. (2001). Inattention, hyperactivity and impulsiveness: their impact on academic achievement and progress. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71 (1), 43-56.
Miller, S. C., Bredemeier, B. J. L. & Shields, D. L. L. (1997). Sociomoral education through physical education with at risk children. Quest, 49 (1), 114-129.
Minick, N. (1996). The development of Vygotksy's thought: an introduction to Thinking and Speech. In: Daniels, H. (ed.) An Introduction to Vygotsky. London, Routledge, pp. 28-52.
Mooney, A., Statham, J., Brady, L.-M., Lewis, J., Gill, C., Henshall, A., Willmott, N., Owen, C. & Evans, K. (2010). Special Educational Needs and Disability: Understanding Local Variation in Prevalence, Service Provision and Support (Extended Summary). London, DCSF
Mooney, P., Epstein, M. H., Reid, R. & Nelson, J. R. (2003). Status of and trends in academic intervention research for students with emotional disturbances. Remedial and Special Education, 24 (5), 273-287.
Moore, G. (2002). In our hands: the future is in the hands of those who give our young people hope and reason to live. British Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 30 (2), 26-27.
Morley, D., Bailey, R., Tan, J. & Cooke, B. (2005). Inclusive physical education: teachers' views of including pupils with special educational needs and/or disabilities in physical education. European Physical Education Review, 11 (1), 84-107.
Nelson, J. R., Babyak, A., Gonzalez, J. & Benner, G. J. (2003). An investigation of the types of problem behaviours exhibited by K-12 students with emotional or behavioural disorders in public school settings. Behavioural Disorders, 28 (4), 348-359.
Nesbitt, E. (2000). Researching 8 to 13-year-olds' perspectives on their experience of religion. In: Lewis, A. & Lindsay, G. (eds.) Researching Children's Perspectives. Buckingham, Open University Press, pp. 135-149.
Nind, M. (2008). Conducting qualitative research with people with learning, communication and other disabilities: Methodological challenges. Swindon, ESRC NCRM
Norwich, B., Cooper, P. & Maras, P. (2002). Attentional and activity difficulties: findings from a national study. Support for Learning, 17 (4), 182-186.
244
Noyes, A. (2005). Pupil voice: purpose, power and the possibilities for democratic schooling. British Educational Research Journal, 31 (4), 532-540.
Nugent, P. & Faucette, N. (1995). Marginalised voices: constructions of and responses to physical education and grading practices by students categorised as gifted or learning disabled. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 14 (4), 418-430.
O'Sullivan, M. (2007). Research quality in physical education and sport pedagogy. Sport, Education and Society, 12 (3), 245-260.
Office for Standards in Education (2006a). Inclusion: Does it Matter Where Pupils are Taught? Provision and Outcomes in Different Settings for Pupils with Learning Difficulties and Disabilities. London, Ofsted.
Office for Standards in Education. (2006b). Inspection Report ref: xxxxxxx. London, Ofsted
Office for Standards in Education. (2006c). School Sport Partnerships: A Survey of Good Practice. London, Ofsted
Office for Standards in Education. (2007). Inspection Report ref: xxxxxxx. London, Ofsted
Office for Standards in Education. (2008). Inspection report ref: xxxxxxx. London, Ofsted
Ohman, M. & Quennerstedt, M. (2008). Feel good - be good: subject content and governing processes in physical education. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 13 (4), 365-379.
Oliffe, J. L. & Bottorff, J. L. (2007). Further than the eye can see? Photo elicitation and research with men. Qualitative Health Research, 17 (6), 850-858.
Parker, S. M. (2002). Preservice Physical Education Teachers‟ Perceptions toward Teaching Students with Emotional/ Behavioral Disorders in a General Education Setting. PhD thesis, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.
Parry, J. (1998). Reid on knowledge and justification in physical education. European Physical Education Review, 4 (1), 70-74.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods (Third Edition). California, Sage.
Penney, D. (2000). Physical education, sporting excellence and educational excellence. European Physical Education Review, 6 (2), 135-150.
Penney, D. & Chandler, T. (2000). Physical education: What future(s)? Sport, Education and Society, 5 (1), 71-87.
245
Polat, F. & Farrell, P. (2002). What was it like for you? - former pupils' reflections on their placement at a residential school for pupils with emotional and behavioural difficulties. Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties, 7 (2), 91-108.
Pope, C. (2006). Interpretive perspectives in physical education research. In: Kirk, D., Macdonald, D. & O'Sullivan, M. (eds.) The Handbook of Physical Education. London, Sage, pp. 21-36.
Portman, P. A. (1995). Who is having fun in physical education classes? Experiences of sixth grade students in elementary and middle schools. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 14 (4), 445-453.
Prizant, B. M., Audet, L. R., Burke, G. M., Hummel, L. J., Maher, S. R. & Theodore, G. (1990). Communication disorders and emotional/behavioral disorders in children and adolescents. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 55 (2), 179-192.
Puchta, C. & Potter, J. (2004). Focus Group Practice. London, Sage.
Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (2007a). National Curriculum for Physical Education; Planning For Inclusion. London, Qualifications and Curriculum Authority.
Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (2007b). Physical Education; programme of study for key stage 3 and attainment target. London, Qualifications and Curriculum Authority.
Radley, A. & Taylor, D. (2003). Images of recovery: a photo-elicitation study on the hospital ward. Qualitative Health Research, 13 (1), 77-99.
Ravet, J. (2007). Enabling pupil participation in a study of perceptions of disengagement: methodological matters. British Journal of Special Education, 34 (4), 234-242.
Reid, A. (1997). Value pluralism and physical education. European Physical Education Review, 3 (1), 6-20.
Richards, L. (2005). Handling Qualitative Data: A Practical Guide. London, Sage.
Ridgers, N. D., Fazey, D. M. A. & Fairclough, S. J. (2007). Perceptions of athletic competence and fear of negative evaluation during physical education. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77 (2), 339-349.
Rikard, G. L. & Banville, D. (2006). High school student attitudes about physical education. Sport, Education and Society, 11 (4), 385-400.
Roberts, M. C., Jacobs, A. K., Puddy, R. W., Nyre, J. E. & Vernberg, E. M. (2003). Treating children with serious emotional disturbances in schools and
246
community: the intensive mental health program. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 34 (5), 519-526.
Robertson, C., Childs, C. & Marsen, E. (2000). Equality and the inclusion of pupils with special educational needs in physical education. In: Capel, S. & Piotrowski, S. (eds.) Issues in Physical Education. Abingdon, RoutledgeFalmer, pp. 47-63.
Ross, N., Holland, S., Renold, E. & Hillman, A. (2008). The multi-sensory experiences of mobile research encounters. ESRC Research Methods Festival, Oxford, UK.
Rovegno, I. (1998). The development of in-service teachers' knowledge of a constructivist approach to physical education: teaching beyond activities. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 69 (2), 147-162.
Rudduck, J. & Fielding, M. (2006). Student voice and the perils of popularity. Educational Review, 58 (2), 219-231.
Sallis, J. F. & McKenzie, T. L. (1991). Physical education‟s role in public health. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 62 (2), 124-137.
Sandford, R. A., Armour, K. M. & Warmington, P. C. (2006). Re-engaging disaffected youth through physical activity programmes. British Educational Research Journal, 32 (2), 251-271.
Sandford, R. A., Duncombe, R. & Armour, K. M. (2008). The role of physical activity / sport in tackling youth disaffection and anti-social behaviour. Educational Review, 60 (4), 419-435.
Schostak, J. F. (2002). Understanding, Designing and Conducting Qualitative Research in Education. Buckingham, Open University Press.
Silk, M. L., Andrews, D. L. & Mason, D. S. (2005). Encountering the field: Sports stuides and qualitative research. In: Andrews, D. L., Mason, D. S. & Silk, M. L. (eds.) Qualitative Methods in Sports Studies. Oxford, Berg, pp. 1-20.
Silverman, D. (2006). Interpretive Qualitative Data (Third Edition). London, Sage.
Silverstein, J. M. & Allison, D. B. (1994). The comparative efficacy of antecedent exercise and methylphenidate: a single-case randomized trial. Child: Care, Health and Development, 20 (1), 47-60.
Smith, A. (2004). The inclusion of pupils with special educational needs in secondary school physical education. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 9 (1), 37-54.
247
Smith, A. & Green, K. (2004). Including pupils with special educational needs in secondary school physical education: a sociological analysis of teachers views. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 25 (5), 593-607.
Smith, A., Green, K. & Thurston, M. (2009). 'Activity choice' and physical education in England and Wales. Sport, Education and Society, 14 (2), 203-222.
Smith, A. & Parr, M. (2007). Young people's views on the nature and purposes of physical education: a sociological analysis. Sport, Education and Society, 12 (1), 37-58.
Smith, A. & Thomas, N. (2006a). Including pupils with special educational needs and disabilities in national curriculum physical education: a brief review. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 21 (1), 69-83.
Smith, A. & Thomas, N. (2006b). Inclusion, special educational needs, disability and physical education. In: Green, K. & Hardman, K. (eds.) Physical Education: Essential Issues. London, Sage, pp. 220-237.
Smith, A., Thurston, M., Lamb, K. & Green, K. (2007). Young people's participation in national curriculum physical education: A study of 15-16 year olds in north-west England and north-east Wales. European Physical Education Review, 13 (2), 165-194.
Smith, L. (1996). The social construction of rational understanding. In: Tryphon, A. & Voneche, J. (eds.) Piaget-Vygotsky; The Social Genesis of Thought. Hove, Psychology Press, pp. 107-122.
Social Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties Association. (2006). Definitions - SEBD and its overlap with disruptive and anti-social behaviour, mental health difficulties and ADHD. Penrith, SEBDA
Sparkes, A. C. (1994). Research paradigms in physical education: some brief comments on differences that make a difference. British Journal of Physical Education (Research Supplement), 14 (summer), 11-16.
Sparkes, A. C. (1995). Writing people: reflections on the dual crisis of representation legitimation in qualitative inquiry. Quest, 47 (2), 158-195.
Sparkes, A. C. (2002). Telling Tales in Sport and Physical Activity. Illinois, Human Kinetics.
Stake, R. E. (1978). The case study method in social inquiry. Educational Researcher, 7 (2), 5-8.
Stake, R. E. (1995). The Art of Case Study Research. London, Sage.
248
Stake, R. E. (2005). Qualitative case studies. In: Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. S. (eds.) The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research (Third Edition). London, SAGE, pp. 443-466.
Steer, A. (2008). Learning Behaviour: Lessons Learned - A review of behaviour standards and practices in our schools. London, Institute of Education
Stroot, S. A. (2002). Socialisation and participation in sport. In: Laker, A. (ed.) The Sociology of Sport and Physical Education. Abingdon, Routledge, pp. 129-147.
Stuart-Hamilton, I. (1999). Key Ideas in Psychology. London, Jessica Kingsley.
Suomi, J., Collier, D. & Brown, L. (2003). Factors affecting the social experiences of students in elementary PE classes. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 22 (2), 186-202.
Supaporn, S. (2000). High school students' perspectives about misbehaviour. Physical Educator, 57 (3), 124-136.
Talbot, M. (1999). The case for physical education. Proceedings: World Summit on Physical Education, Berlin. ICSSPE, 39-50.
Talbot, M. (2008). Valuing physical education - package or pedagogy? Physical Education Matters, 3 (3), 6-8.
Tannehill, D. (2009). Physical Education for All: The impact of Curriculum on Student Choice. BERA PESP SIG Seminar, Birmingham, UK.
Tantillo, M., Kesick, C. M., Hynd, G. W. & Dishman, R. K. (2002). The effects of exercise on children with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 34 (2), 203-213.
Telama, R. & Polvi, S. (2007). Facilitating prosocial behaviour in physical education. In: Liukkonen, J., Vanden Auweele, Y., Vereijken, B., Alfermann, D. & Theodorakis, Y. (eds.) Psychology for Physical Educators (Second Edition). Champaign, Illinois, Human Kinetics, pp. 85-99.
Travell, C. (1999). Emotional and behavioural difficulties: perspectives on perspectives. In: Visser, J. & Rayner, S. (eds.) Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties: A Reader. Staffordshire, QEd, pp. 7-15.
Travell, C. & Visser, J. (2006). 'ADHD Does bad stuff to you': young people's and parents' experiences and perceptions of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties, 11 (3), 205-216.
Trent, S. C., Artiles, A. J. & Englert, C. S. (1998). From deficit thinking to social constructivism: a review of theory, research, and practice in special education. Review of Research in Education, 23 (3), 277-307.
249
United Nations. (1989). Convention on the rights of the child [Online]. Available from http://www.unicef.org/crc/index_30177.html [Accessed 15th September 2006].
United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organisation. (1994). The Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action on Special Needs Education [Online]. Available from http://www.unesco.org/education/pdf/SALAMA_E.PDF [Accessed 15th September 2006].
Vickerman, P. (2007a). Teaching Physical Education to Children with Special Educational Needs. Oxon, Routledge.
Vickerman, P. (2007b). Training physical education teachers to include children with special educational needs: Perspectives from physical education initial teacher training providers. European Physical Education Review, 13 (3), 385-402.
Vickerman, P. & Coates, J. (2009). Trainee and recently qualified physical education teachers' perspectives on including children with special educational needs. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 14 (2), 137-153.
Vickerman, P., Hayes, S. & Whetherly, A. (2003). Special educational needs and the national curriculum physical education. In: Hayes, S. & Stidder, G. (eds.) Equity and Inclusion in Physical Education and Sport; Contemporary issues for teachers, trainees and practitioners. London, Routledge, pp. 47-64.
Vidoni, C. & Ward, P. (2009). Effects of Fair Play Instruction on Student Social Skills During a Middle School Sport Education Unit. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 14 (3), 285 – 310.
Visser, J. & Stokes, S. (2003). Is education ready for the inclusion of pupils with emotional and behavioural difficulties; a rights perspective. Educational Review, 55 (1), 65-75.
Vogler, E. W. & Bishop, P. (1990). Management of disruptive behaviour in physical education. Physical Educator, 47 (1), 16-27.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. London, Harvard University Press.
Warburton, V. & Spray, C. (2008). Motivation in physical education across the primary-secondary school transition. European Physical Education Review, 14 (2), 157-178.
Warnock, H. M. (1978). Special Educational Needs: Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Education of Handicapped Children and Young People. London, HMSO
Wearmouth, J. & Connors, B. (2004). Understanding student behaviour in schools. In: Wearmouth, J., Richmond, R. C., Glynn, T. & Berryman, M. (eds.)
250
Understanding Pupil Behaviour in Schools; a Diversity of Approaches. London, David Fulton, pp. 1-15.
Weiss, M. R. & Horn, T. S. (1990). The relation between children's accuracy estimates of their physical competence and achievement-related characteristics. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 61 (3), 250-258.
Whitehead, M. (2000). Aims as an issue in physical education. In: Capel, S. & Piotrowski, S. (eds.) Issues in Physical Education. Oxon, RoutledgeFalmer, pp. 7-21.
Williams, A. (1996). Problematising physical education practice: pupil experience as a focus for relflection. European Journal of Physical Education, 1 (1), 19-35.
Williams, A. & Woodhouse, J. (1996). Delivering the discourse - urban adolescents' perceptions of physical education. Sport, Education and Society, 1 (2), 201-213.
Wise, S. (2000). Listen to Me! The Voices of Pupils with Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties. London, Lucky Duck.
Woolfson, R. C., Harker, M., Lowe, D., Shields, M. & Mackintosh, H. (2007). Consulting with children and young people who have disabilities: views of accessibility to education. British Journal of Special Education, 34 (1), 40-49.
Wright, H. & Sugden, D. (1999). Physical Education for All; Developing Physical Education in the Curriculum for Pupils with Special Educational Needs. London, David Fulton Publishers.
Wright, J. (2004). Critical inquiry and problem-solving in physical education. In: Wright, J., Macdonald, D. & Burrows, L. (eds.) Critical Inquiry and Problem-Solving in Physical Education. London, Routledge, pp. 3-15.
Wright, J. & Burrows, L. (2006). Re-conceiving ability in physical education: a social analysis. Sport, Education and Society, 11 (3), 275-291.
Wright, P. M., White, K. & Gaebler-Spira, D. (2004). Exploring the relevance of the personal and social responsibility model in adapted physical activity: a collective case study. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 23 (1), 71-87.
251
Appendices
252
Appendix A – Letters of Consent and Assent (School, Parent/Guardians,
Participants)
253
The experiences of the young person with Social Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties in Physical Education
Rationale
This study will explore the concepts of Physical Education (PE) and Social, Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties (SEBD). In applying a range of methods including field notes taken during classes and recordings of discussions with students, it will look to give voice to the students experiences and perceptions of PE. We want to put the child at the centre of the research. We want to give them the opportunity to express their thoughts, their experiences, and their opinions.
Aims
1. To listen to, appreciate, and interpret the perceptions and experiences of secondary school pupils with SEBD to PE
2. To identify areas of similarity and difference, between cases, in their experiences of National Curriculum PE.
3. To discuss observed institutional commonalities across cases
Case Study Procedures
Various data collection methods will be used over the course of ten to twelve weeks, dependant on both the stage of the study as a whole and the individual case study in question. Methods are likely to include both informal conversations, and formal interviews discussing a variety of issues regarding the thoughts of your children about PE and how they perceive it as affecting their behaviour. As part of this research PE lessons will also be observed and field notes will be taken. In some instances, photographs taken by the students during PE lessons may be used during interviews and focus groups as mediating artefacts which will help improve the information gleaned from the interactions with the participants. Some information on your school (i.e. behaviour policy etc) will also be useful in this case.
Possible Risks, Discomfort, Safety and Injury
There are no direct physical risks associated with this study other than those normally associated with participation in PE. If children involved in this study experience pain, discomfort or injury he/she should continue to notify their class teacher as per usual.
It is possible that reflecting upon and discussing their behaviour might make the children feel uneasy. The discussion of past experiences may also do this. If this is the case, the child is encouraged to make this clear to the researcher immediately who will then endeavour to make every effort to alert relevant persons at your school to this fact. This will be discussed with the child and their parent/guardian at the onset of this research. If the children involved have any thoughts or concerns as a result of this process then they will be encouraged to discuss these with the researcher, your Special Educational Needs Co-Coordinator, or your Educational Welfare Officer.
Benefits
The children involved may feel that the self reflective process embedded in this procedure is somehow beneficial to their own behaviour. By taking part in this research, your school will be
Richard Medcalf [email protected]
Graduate Research School
Direct Line: +44 (0) 1905 855416
254
helping us to increase the knowledge base of this subject area, which may benefit your children in the future.
Can the participant stop taking part?
The children identified by your school as being suitable to engage in this research can change their mind and decide to withdraw from this project at any time. What information will be collected, and how will it be used? Data will be collected using the procedure outlined above and will then be analysed for the purposes of a research degree (PhD) at the University of Worcester. This will likely include notes taken by the researcher, transcripts of conversations (both formal and informal), and notes made by the children. If any work resulting from this research is published then no identifiable characteristics of either your school or the participants will be made public. Pseudonyms will be used for both your school and the participants involved. A copy of the completed results will be given to you if you ask for them. Please keep this information sheets for your record; you can however ask questions about the project at any time. Please contact me directly using the contact details below. Many thanks for your support, Richard Medcalf
255
INFORMED CONSENT FOR RESEARCH INVOLVEMENT
- School Version -
Please read the following statements carefully. Sign only when you have agreed with all of the statements and when you have had any relevant questions answered
I have read the information sheet for the study and the full details of the data collection procedures have been explained to me. I am clear about what my school‟s involvement will be in this study and I am aware of its purposes.
I trust that results will only be used in complete confidentiality and for the academic purposes of this study only.
I have received copies of what will be sent to parents, including the introductory letter containing the parental consent form, and the participant assent sheet.
I am satisfied that the results will be stored securely, remain confidential, and if published will not be linked to this school or the children within it in any way
I hereby give my full consent for the study to be undertaken providing written consent of the involved participants and their parents is obtained.
Name:………………………………………….(Head Teacher) Signature:…………………………………….. Date: Name:…………………………………(Special Educational Needs Coordinator) Signature:…………………………………….. Date: Name:……………………………(Head of Physical Education/Director of Sport) Signature:…………………………………….. Date:
256
Dear [Parent/Guardian name],
[Childs name] has been selected to participate in a research project which is taking place at [name of school]. The school has given their support for this research, and are a key partner in the project which will involve me spending ten to twelve weeks in [name of school].
Why? Purpose of the research
Recognising the importance of all school subjects, this study is particularly looking at physical education and the unique relationship that your child will have with it. We are aiming to explore the relationship between involvement in physical education and any experiences which your child has had. Through the application of a range of methods, it will look to give voice to their experiences and perceptions of physical education. We want to put the child at the centre of the research. We want to give them the opportunity to express their thoughts and their opinions.
How? Case Study Procedures
Various data collection methods will be used dependant upon how best we can work with your child and the nature of our time in school. Methods are likely to include both informal conversations, and formal interviews discussing a variety of issues regarding your child‟s thoughts about PE and how they perceive it as affecting their behaviour. As part of this research PE lessons in which your child is taking part in will also be observed and field notes will be taken.
Impact?
Your child may feel that the self-reflective process embedded in this procedure is somehow beneficial to their own behaviour. However, it is also possible that reflecting upon and discussing their behaviour and past experiences might make your child feel uneasy. This will be discussed with your child at the outset of this research and we will talk about how we will deal with this possibility should it arise. The school is supportive of this research and are closely involved should any problems occur. Your child will be encouraged to talk about any concerns with the researcher who will then endeavour to make every effort to alert relevant persons in the school to this fact. Your child can, of course, change their mind and decide to withdraw from this research at any time.
In accordance with your child‟s schools child protection policy and in compliance with Local Authority procedures for child protection, if (during discussions with your child) I receive any information which I consider to put them at risk, I am obliged to speak with [child protection rep]. Data will be collected using the procedure outlined above and will then be analysed for the purposes of a research degree (PhD) at the University of Worcester. If any work resulting from this research is published then no identifiable characteristics of either school or participant will be made public. Pseudonyms will be used for both your child and their school. If you have any questions or thoughts about this project then please feel free to discuss these with me. Alternatively you can discuss these with your school via the Special Educational Needs Co-Coordinator or the Head of PE. Please contact me directly on the contact details given above or alternatively via the staff involved at your school. Many thanks, Richard Medcalf
Richard Medcalf [email protected]
Graduate Research School
Direct Line: +44 (0) 1905 855416
257
INFORMED CONSENT FOR RESEARCH INVOLVEMENT
- Parent Version -
Please read the following statements carefully. Sign only when you have agreed with all of the statements and when you have had any relevant questions answered
I understand the connotations of this research proposal and the full details of the data
collection procedures have been explained to me. I am clear about what my child‟s
involvement will be in this study and I am aware of its purposes.
I trust that results will only be used in complete confidentiality and for the academic
purposes of this study only. I am satisfied that the results will be stored securely, remain
confidential, and if published will not be linked to my child in any way.
I have agreed for my child to take part
I know I can withdraw my child at any time
I have had the chance to ask questions
I have read this form and I understand it. I agree for my child to take part in the study.
Child‟s Name:
Signed …………………………………………. (Parent/Guardian) Date:
258
You have been selected by your PE teacher, and your Inclusion Manager, to be
involved in some research. I have already spoken to your school, and your
[parent(s)/guardian], and they have said that it is ok for me to speak to you. My
name is Richard. I am visiting your school for ten weeks, everyday, to speak to
students like you to help me in my research.
This will involve me spending a lot of time with you. I will be watching lessons
that you are in, and will take notes. Importantly, I will also be speaking to you a
lot. We will sometimes do this in small groups, and sometimes it will just be you
and me. I am very interested in finding out what you think about your
experiences in PE. There are no right or wrong answers. Everything you
experience, everything that you think, and everything that you say to me, is
important.
During our time together, we will talk about what interests you. We will talk
about your experiences in PE, including your behaviour. I might ask questions
to help you to figure out what you think. This will sometimes be in a room, and
will sometimes be an informal conversation. I will either be taking notes, or will
record what we say on a voice recorder. I will then listen to this and, alongside
my other notes, will write a piece of work that talks about your views.
When I write this piece of work, people may read it. In this report I will give you
and your school different names, so that no one will know that it is your views
which I am writing about. What we talk about is private, between you and me.
However, in the same way in which your teachers would behave, if you tell me
anything which I consider might put you at risk of being hurt, then I will have to
speak to [name of child protection rep] about it.
Richard Medcalf [email protected]
Graduate Research School
Direct Line: +44 (0) 1905 855416
259
If you agree to take part, I will ask you to sign below, which gives me permission
to talk to you. If you have any questions, about any part of this research, then I
hope that you will feel comfortable enough to either ask me or your teacher
about it.
ASSENT FOR RESEARCH INVOLVEMENT
Please read the following statements. Once you have had everything explained
to you and you understand all of this information, then please sign at the
bottom.
I have read the information sheet about this research and I am clear about
what Richard is doing in my school.
I understand what my involvement will be in this study
I have agreed to take part
I know I can decide not to take part at any time
I have had the chance to ask questions
I have read this form and I understand it. I agree to take part in the study.
Name:
Signed …………………………………………. (Participant) Date:
260
Appendix B – Sample of Research Diary
261
[Date] (Week Four)
Decisions need to be made this week regarding participants. This will allow time for
communication with both pupils and parents before half term (3 weeks away), with the aim of
starting interviews directly after.
9am 8B with [staff], cricket, indoors, bowling. Their only lesson this week, so it was important
that it‟s a good and useful one. See interaction sheets for specific notes on both Jack and Tom.
10am 9B with [staff], cricket, this time outside. Paul and other potential peers for inclusion were
both in the lesson and I had some noteworthy interactions with them both during this time. Paul
was very keen on a game within today‟s lesson; see interaction sheet for further information.
Others were quiet today. He was a little fidgety during instructional time, but when involved he
was quiet. He wasn‟t massively involved in the fielding tasks, with two very active personalities
either side of him. He became more talkative towards me when I was batting, and he was
keeping wicket. His relationship with PE is very different to that of the others in his class. He
doesn‟t seem to have the confidence in participation to allow any real personality to come
through. It would be of great interest to see some papers on him.
[Date]
11:20am 9B indoors due to the weather, their first bowling lesson, with [staff]. Before the lesson,
the boys were congregating outside of the fire door. The banged on the door and called me
over. After asking about what is planned for the lesson, we had a good informal chat. The group
were quite hyperactive today, which made for some interesting observations. [A peer] was ever
more active, he was in a bowling lane with Paul and a peer, and acted up accordingly! He
demonstrated a general undercurrent of off task behaviours, nothing too noticeable or
concerning, he just spent little time on task. We spoke about his bowling technique, and he
seemed to react well to this. [Staff] recounted a time when he lost his rag with his behaviour,
something which I‟ve not yet seen to be necessary myself. Information on Paul‟s participation in
the lesson has been made directly in his interaction record.
[Date]
9:00am, 8A. The first time I‟d been with this group for a while, as there isn‟t a participant in the
class with whom I plan to directly work. However, it remains important to be known by the whole
year group, in situations like today‟s and tomorrow‟s lunch hours. The group worked well, cricket
outside again with [staff], working on their bowling, very similar lesson to Tuesday‟s with 8B, just
with a lot less disruption!
Lunchtime – years 8 and 9 competitive games. Today, football.
[Date]
9am, 8A, [staff] teaching the group. They were split into two halves for the whole hour, with
each side playing a full game. I umpired one side of the courts. No participant based notes.
262
10am, 9B, S[staff] again, and again a whole lesson devoted to a game. Paul and [a peer] were
both without kit and injured, so did not participate in the lesson. It was interesting to see them in
a different light, when they weren‟t involved in the practical elements of the lesson. See
interaction sheet.
Lunchtime – years 8 and 9 competitive games. Tom was playing rugby, see interaction sheet.
[Date] (Week 5)
Not in school – bank holiday.
[Date]
2:15pm – 8B with [staff] in [staff]‟s absence. Both Jack and Tom were on fine form today. I took
the decision to sit on the bench with those waiting to bat; a choice which worked out well and
which resulted in a good number of positive discussions. Both Tom and Jack sat by me whilst
their teams were batting, and both were in a talkative mood. See interaction sheets. Both
conversations were a useful opportunity to give a tangible sign of trust, in that by not going to
[staff] with these tales; they now know I am one to be trusted with their thoughts. Next time that I
see both of these, I will be talking to them about the interviews.
[Date]
11:20am, cricket lesson on the tennis courts with [staff] teaching, 9B. Final lesson of cricket
before starting tennis and athletics next week. Their only lesson of the week. [Staff] let them
play a whole game, but still only on the tennis courts. I again made the decision to sit with the
batting team. This seemed to work out well with lots of conversation and game related banter!
See interaction sheets.
I later met with [staff] to discuss the possibility of making use of morning registration periods. He
approved the idea, and advised I speak with [staff], pastoral leader and teacher of maths, to ask
to act as an intermediary between myself and form tutors.
[Date]
During break time, I spoke with Tom on the field about the study and his involvement in it. See
interaction sheet.
11:20am, 8B for their second lesson of the week. They missed out on having a lesson on
Monday. First (and last) cricket game to be played on the wicket. Sat with boys on batting
benches, all were very hyperactive. For information on Jack and Tom discussions, see
interaction sheets.
In the afternoon, I spoke with parents of both year 8 participants, all of whom had relevant
selection based questions but were all encouraging of their child‟s participation.
[Date]
263
Not in school.
[Date] (Week 6)
Not in school.
[Date]
9am, 8B, first tennis lesson of the year. They hadn‟t done tennis in year 7, so [staff] was
teaching them for their first ever tennis lesson. See interaction sheet for specific Jack and Tom
notes.
10am 9B, also their first tennis lesson. [staff] taught the same lesson as he did for the year 8‟s.
He again asked me to look after a three court area.
After the lesson, I had a useful ten minutes with [staff], the pastoral support manager. We
agreed to meet on Friday, and she said it would be fine to start interviews next week having
contacted form tutors this week.
[Date]
This morning I met with[staff], Jack and Tom‟s form tutor. She has copies of their interview
schedules and is happy with the process. Copies have also been given to [staff]. [Staff] will get
copies on Friday.
11:20am, 9B for their second tennis lesson. Odd numbers in the group, so I take part. It went
well, with lots shouting my name when it came to swap partners every 5 minutes. Paul did just
that once, so we had a game. See interaction sheet for further detail.
[Date]
Not in school.
[Date]
9am meeting with[staff], pastoral manager, had to be re-arranged. She was busy. I instead had
a brief meeting with [staff], Paul‟s tutor. She‟s pleased about his involvement, and mentioned
that she tries to use a lot of praise with him. She thinks that he bore‟s easily, is attention seeking
due to family background (mother spends a lot of time with younger brother). Advised that Paul
has done anger management in the past as he used to lash out.
10am 9B, today was due to be their first lesson of athletics (on their bi-weekly rotation),
however due to the inclement weather they were kept inside to play a game of indoor cricket.
See interaction sheet for notes on Paul‟s involvement in the lesson.
[Date] (Week 7)
264
9:00am 8B first athletics lesson of the year, long jump. Exams on in the sports hall therefore the
class were queuing indoors. Jack and Tom interaction notes made direct into interaction sheets.
Both asked about their chats with me, and I was able to remind Tom about tomorrow morning.
[Date]
8:40am BCJ.T.200508, folder A. First interview with Jack, see interaction sheet. Went well, he
seemed to struggle a little with the information at the start of the session. A brief ten minutes of
actual dialogue, but a productive and talkative session.
2:15pm 8B athletics lesson (shot put) with [staff]. [Staff] is out of school, as are some group
members, on an athletics trip. A very tough lesson, with a high proportion of the group in a
hyperactive and generally mischievous mood. The group first went to the GCSE room to watch
a demonstration video, and then moved onto the bottom field. Freshly cut grass to throw, balls
to kick, shot puts to mess with, and water to squirt. A draining lesson; parts of which were very
entertaining (and a struggle not to make this obvious) and parts of which were difficult not to
intervene in. [staff] had to raise his voice a number of times, unlike him and against school
shouting policy. Detailed interactions with Tom and Jack are given in their interaction records.
[Date]
8:40am BCT.T.210508, folder B. Tom‟s first interview, seemed to go well. He spoke well for the
time that we had to work with, and asked pertinent questions of the information given at the
start.
11:20am 9B, only lesson of this week, their first athletics lesson due to last week‟s weather.
Paul had a note from his mum, had pulled a muscle playing football yesterday lunchtime.
Debateable. He spent the lesson raking the long jump pit and mucking around with his mate.
Lots of equipment to be played with. Often sat on bin watching the girls‟ lesson. Was a good
lesson for meaningless conversational banter. Reminded Paul of Friday‟s meeting. See
interaction sheet.
[Date]
11:20am 8B for a lesson of tennis with [staff]. Change of staff for the students to experience.
[Staff] commented to me that the group aren‟t behaving how he would like them to in their
lessons with [staff]. He was vociferous in his “classroom management”, raising his voice a
number of times to control the group as a whole. There were a number of occasions where the
tennis racquets and balls were too much of a temptation for many members of the group. Balls
were smashed onto the road at regular intervals. For reference to Tom and Jack, see their
respective interaction records.
[Date]
265
8:40am BCP.T.230508, folder C. First interview with Paul. It went well, he obviously needs
something to fidget with during the interviews, but he seemed to understand the process and
was pleased to be leaving his form time. See transcript and interaction notes.
266
Appendix C – Indicative Participant Interaction Record
267
Brownhill Student File – Paul (Interaction Record) Name: Paul
Date Interaction Notes
[Date] [Date] [Date] [Date] [Date]
Lesson (lesson content) Lesson (lesson content) Lesson (lesson content) Lesson (lesson content) Lesson (lesson content)
[Physical description of Paul]. He was surprisingly quiet today (according to [staff]), but still appeared to push the boundaries of the rules. He wasn‟t shy in using swear words, but showed no sign of a bullying mentality (as mentioned by [staff]). He would openly speak to me whilst he was batting, and appears to be a very possible participant. [Further physical descriptions]. His ability in PE is markedly higher than some others in the group. He seems to approach the lesson with an element of excitement, one of anticipation. He openly told me that he doesn‟t like cricket and doesn‟t think that he‟s very good at it, but his performance in this morning‟s lesson shows that his fundamental motor skills serve him well compared to others in the group. He doesn‟t suffer fools gladly, something which, as someone for whom performance ability seems to be a key issue, is a bit of a problem in his group. He spoke before the lesson about getting sent off at the weekend, he seems to love the attention from peers. Paul was on time, and keen to get inside quickly. His behaviour was more noticeable today. Still not overly-disruptive of others learning, there was an undercurrent of bad language and unpleasant comments towards peers. In the game scenario at the end of the lesson, he was vehement in his insistence that he should bat more than others. An aggressive performer, strikes through the ball at pace. Took lots of catches again, and always looks up to check that people have seen. He‟s opening up and becoming more conversational, little things, like asking about the time. Paul was on good form, talkative and approachable. He batted well during the warm up game, smacked me on the hip with the ball, laughed, but was apologetic and later asked if I were ok. He seems to be aggressive during games, likes to be paired with a friend. Seems to want to be in the thick of the action, he‟d move to where the ball was most often going. [Staff] advises that he‟s a very different character in rugby. Paul was very keen on a game today, he shouted out his wishes during the register! After a short warm up, the group moved into working on skill development. He scored highly, and stayed in for a while, but was later annoyed when others who were fielding with him dropped one of the other lads, “no one can f**king catch”. We later paired up and Paul and I scored the highest number of runs. He was very happy, gave me a knuckle tap after getting out! When he later found out that next week was bowling, he said he wouldn‟t be coming to it, as he hates
268
[Date] [Date] [Date]
Breaktime Lesson (lesson content) Lesson (lesson content) Lesson (lesson content) Left message for parents ref: consent
bowling. Will be interesting to see how he reacts differently to it. Paul was talking with a friend during break time, who called me over to see them. They just wanted to chat about PE, with a peer telling Paul what we did yesterday and what he should expect from his lesson today. A good demonstration that they know me well enough to communicate on a conversational level. Paul was „full of it‟ today; this was pre-empted somewhat by his comment yesterday, that he hated bowing. He came into the lesson complaining of a bad elbow, but got changed nonetheless. After spending the time on the benches pinching everyone else, he bowled one ball and sat down. He thought that he looked like a twat and he wanted to go outside. Issues of ability and space. I sat and spoke to him, after I had overheard [staff] trying to bribe him with a fiver and a mars bar! After I had asked what was wrong, we had a good chat, but he still wouldn‟t go and bowl. When the group moved into a task which needed a batsman, Paul was asked to be it; he was rewarded for his non-participation! He struggled to remain on task, often kicking the ball and disrupting other “lanes”. Once everyone had left the room, he bowled a ball and hit the stumps first time. It must have something to do with his perception as to what his peers think about him. [Staff] told me of a time when, on the trampoline, Paul reacted badly to not being competent in his performance. Paul thought that today was a bowling lesson, and so had a note “from his mum” to excuse him. He wanted to change his mind, but wouldn‟t take the option of wearing the old kit from the stores. A peer had no note, but said that he was injured. They were both given many jobs by [staff], shuttling kit etc. Paul came and spoke to me mid lesson, and wasn‟t happy with the amount of jobs which he was given. He asked how long they‟d got left on cricket, as he wanted to change. Said he hates tennis and athletics, so annoyed that these are next. A friend later found a bouncy ball, and both him and Paul resisted calls from [staff] to stop messing about with it. They were both very mischievous today. Without any real task direction they spent the majority of their time looking for trouble. Paul attempted bowling for the first time in front of his peers, and bowled a peer out (caught)! He was visibly pleased with himself, but wouldn‟t show it. Tried to play cool. He would always want to bat first, which would mean that he faced their best bowlers, and promptly got out, twice. I walked in with Paul after the lesson and spoke to him about the study. He was receptive to the idea and asked some pertinent questions which showed that he was at least listening. No initial response. Subsequent discussion.
269
[Date] [Date] [Date] [Date] [Date] [Date] [Date]
Lunchtime Lesson (lesson content) Lesson (lesson content) Lesson (lesson content) Lesson (lesson content) Interview BCP[ddmmyy] Lesson (lesson content)
Paul saw me on the field at lunchtime and came over to tell me he‟d got his consent signed. He didn‟t have it with him today. I ping-ed him a ball to his feet, he‟s easily impressed. Paul didn‟t have his kit today, and complained of an injured foot. He spent the lesson helping [staff] order equipment for next year‟s GCSE group. He concentrated well and didn‟t disrupt the lesson. Paul saw me in the corridor prior to the lesson, and shouted that he‟d be taking part. He and I had a pair‟s game during the lesson. Was good to participate one on one with him. He started the lesson in disruptive mood, a tennis racket is obviously quite a temptation to him, and he couldn‟t help but smash balls around. He also went around the group stealing others rackets if he thought they were better than his. [Staff] gave him a couple of warnings throughout the lesson, but nothing came of it. He has good skills, but always wants to smash the balls. In a game where he couldn‟t smash his (i.e. small court, no net, aim to control), he would always leather any from other courts which came close. Prior to the lesson, Paul asked me to look after his earring and questioned what we‟d be doing today. He seemed happy with this outcome, as his initial response was that “athletics is shit”. I scored and bowled for the lesson. It started off looking like it could be a tough lesson, with Paul inserting “smells” after everyone‟s name in the register, but he soon focussed when put on a team and into field. He fielded well in front of the mats, stopping boundaries, and scored a lot of runs with a straight bat. He seemed to be very agitated when waiting to bat; he‟d often hit bats against the mats and would skip the queue to bat next. Paul spent the lesson raking the long jump pit and mucking around with a friend. He had given [staff] a note from his mum, complaining of a pulled muscle. Was soon to run around in jest. Lots of equipment to be played with. Often sat on bin watching the girls‟ lesson. Was a good lesson for meaningless conversational banter. Paul‟s first interview. It went well; he had remembered that we were together as I came to meet him. He asked me to read assent to him, and spent the rest of the duration fidgeting with the envelope. Possibly worth making sure that he has something to play with every interview! He was talkative after we had finished as he made his way to his first lesson. Paul was late arriving to the lesson, but quick to change. Again, he sought out the “best” racquet at the start of the lesson. There were even numbers in the group, so I wasn‟t able to participate and, with [staff] teaching, stood with [staff] for the duration. A forehand lesson, we spend most of the time fetching stray balls! Paul wasn‟t overly
270
[Date] [Date] [Date] [Date] [Date] [Date]
Lesson (lesson content) Interview BCP[ddmmyy] Lesson (lesson content) Lesson (lesson content) Interview BCP[ddmmyy] Lesson (lesson content)
disruptive today, despite the occasional smash of a ball or inability to pause during instruction. Paul didn‟t have kit today, and was quick to offer up a note from home. Think that he potentially thought that it was an athletics lesson. He took part in tennis activities in school uniform, an hour on two handed backhand. Odd numbers; participation! We didn‟t play each other, but were close on courts. There was almost constant laughter coming from his and a friends‟ court. Each time the group were called in, he‟d hit a ball into the crowd. In final competition, interestingly, he chose to start at the bottom of the ladder, so as he could move up with each game won. He chose to play peers of lesser ability, and won both of his final two games. Second interview, talkative but in need of something tactile to fidget with. See transcript. Impulsive and fidgety. A lesson on sprinting, which Paul wasn‟t keen on taking part in. He didn‟t have his kit (as discussed in interview) and was given a jumper to wear by [staff]. He took part in the lesson, pairing up with a friend. He behaved well when given clear direction, and performed well in the sprint tasks. When asked to take part in more complex skill development drills, he would decline, and just sprint as per usual so as to ensure that he won the race. He was keen to beat peers, and would often come to me to ask about his time. Towards the end of the lesson, he sat on the grass bank, having had enough. This was Paul‟s only PE lesson this week, athletics, triple jump. He saw me at break time to tell me he wouldn‟t be doing it. No note or kit. He‟d have done it if it were a different activity, he‟s very choosy. We had a couple of good talks during the lesson sat on the bank. He was telling me how he‟d hated PE recently, and was annoyed that they couldn‟t do football or rounder‟s. He helped with elements of the lesson, and took pictures (seemingly without thought). He was aggressive towards peers who were playing with sand near him, and didn‟t have his friend to buddy up to. We joked about times in the past where he‟s hit me with a tennis ball, in anticipation of next week‟s lessons. He continued to ask about whether the three involved could come to me as a group one week. Good interview with Paul. Lots of outcomes worthy of discussion next week. A lot of time spent in conversation about football, as I felt it important to empathise with him and build a stronger colloquial relationship. I‟d heard Paul in the corridor before the lesson, telling [staff] that he had his kit today. It became the only opportunity I‟ve had to see Paul play football. With it being wet and no indoor space, a decision was taken to change from tennis to football. Paul seemed very pleased, and spent the start of the lesson rushing back and forth hurrying peers out of the changing rooms. His team won,
271
[Date] [Date] [Date] [Date] [Date] [Date] [Date]
Interview BCP[ddmmyy] Lesson (lesson content) Lesson (lesson content) Interview BCP[ddmmyy] Lesson (lesson content) Lesson (lesson content) Interview BCP[ddmmyy]
and he was by far the best player. Not managing to get the best of my defending, his team beat us. He had the camera for the lesson, but wouldn‟t take any photos. Threw himself around a lot (playing on concrete), and didn‟t want to break it. Some big tackles and some colourful language when others didn‟t play well. He played in a team of weaker players. [Staff] teaching, the lesson just consisted of a tournament. Another positive and talkative interview. Conversation is still flowing and relatively on task. A lesson of indoor high jump. [Staff] introduced the lesson before the boys were changed, and Paul reacted with discontent to the idea. He didn‟t think he‟d bother taken part. Late to the lesson, Paul eventually came out, in kit, flanked by two friends. He took an active part in the lesson, but didn‟t once attempt anything which would resemble a text book high jump. He‟d most often jump head first over the bar. [Staff] didn‟t react. For the majority of the time, he wasn‟t disruptive in class, just wouldn‟t jump correctly. Later, he was spoken to after playing on the mats whilst [staff] was attempting a demonstration. Again, he delighted in taking photos throughout. Paul is absent from school and missed this lesson. Penultimate interview with Paul. Tennis lesson with [staff]. He complained at the start of a bad ankle, and wasn‟t sure whether he‟d take part or not. I was sent to the top courts as his partner to see how he‟d get on. This was where we stayed for the whole lesson. He wasn‟t keen on taking part in any skill practices, as he couldn‟t work out the smash. [Staff] allowed us both to just play a whole court game for the duration of the lesson. Due to weather, [staff‟s] planned javelin lesson becomes the first of a two lesson tournament with both [staff] and I captains. Today, indoor tri-cricket. I pick Paul first and we mould our winning team. It was a high tempo lesson, and Paul played well. He had high expectations of team mates and would get angry at dropped catches etc. He took delight in catching [staff] out. He lamented himself for getting out cheaply, and would more often than not jump the queue waiting to bat. Final interview with Paul, in which we discussed the photos he‟d previously taken. See transcript.
272
Appendix D – Exemplar Interview Continuation Report
273
Interview continuation report – BCP[dmmyy].BCP[ddmmyy]
Lessons learnt from content of interview ref: BCP[ddmmyy] Importance of external tangible rewards for his behaviours. Would like his brother to be in trouble so that his mum would favour him more. His enjoyment of Army day. Was pleased with his bowling. Likes taking people out when playing hockey. Being outside wouldn‟t help him work. He would just talk and throw stones. He‟s not been bothered about missing his PE lesson, because he was playing computer games at home. Although, he‟s annoyed to have missed a fun lesson. Thought High Jump lesson was crap. Felt nice jumping onto crash mats. His aim was to make everyone laugh, was never going to do it properly. Would listen if he thought he could improve (i.e. cricket). Always used to mess about in Dance. A girls thing. Doesn‟t like gymnastics, prefers team-games. Likes to beat someone.
Incidents since (from pupil interaction sheets and research diary entries): [Date] – Tennis lesson with [staff]. He complained at the start of a bad ankle, and wasn‟t sure whether he‟d take part or not. I was sent to the top courts as his partner to see how he‟d get on. This was where we stayed for the whole lesson. He wasn‟t keen on taking part in any skill practices, as he couldn‟t work out the smash. [Staff] allowed us both to just play a whole court game for the duration of the lesson. [Date] - Due to weather, [staff]‟s planned javelin lesson becomes the first of a two lesson tournament with both [staff] and I captains. Today, indoor tri-cricket. I pick Paul first and we mould our winning team. It was a high tempo lesson, and Paul played well. He had high expectations of team mates and would get angry at dropped catches etc. He took delight in catching [staff] out. He lamented himself for getting out cheaply, and would more often than not jump the queue waiting to bat.
Resultant planning for interview ref: BCP[ddmmyy] Final interview with Paul, making use of the photos which he‟s taken in previous weeks. In relation to the photos, discussion of pertinent themes from previous discussions (performance, competitive nature, faining injury, needs something to touch, kit, no point in athletics, likes messing around, thinks you learn through games, makes the day go quicker, relaxes him, sometimes makes him lively, hurting others, playing against challenging opponents who aren‟t better than him, wanting to beat others).
274
Appendix E – Set of Thematic Interview Questions (Exemplar)
275
Exemplar Questions The development and justification of research questions. Framed within aims of my study. Done so with an acknowledgement of methodological framework of interpretivism (aiming for an understanding, seeing how others construct meanings of their world, humans act (behave) in accordance with their subjective understanding of their world (see Pope, 2006)). Six key themes, each to be covered by each participant over the course of the data collection process. Questions within them are exemplar, and not exclusive, not ordered (hence not numbered). Working document in addition to the individual questions generated by experiences, as noted in interaction sheets. Historical context and subject affinity o E.g. how have they experienced PE in the past? How does this underpin their current
perceptions? Environment and Space o E.g. how do the learning environments affect their experiences in PE? Relationships with others o E.g. how do their relationships with others, through PE, affect their experiences Choice, curriculum and ability o E.g. how important are choices to them. Subject choice. Spatial choice and decisions. Pedagogy o E.g. importance of teaching practice. Difference to other subjects. Behaviour o E.g. how does the content of their lessons affect their experience of PE and in turn their
behaviour? 1. Historical context and subject affinity What are your thoughts about PE? (BGI, how do they conceptualise PE, their experiences of it) What parts of PE do you (dis)like? (BGI, elements within PE) What would you say makes a good PE lesson? What do you enjoy the most about PE? (BGI, what is PE capable of to them, what motivates them to participate?) What do you think that you learn in PE? (BGI, what they think its aims are, why do they think they do PE?) What does taking part in PE mean to you? (RI Fitzgerald (2006, p761)) What value do you place on PE? (RI Fitzgerald (2006, p761)) How do you feel when you‟re on your way to PE? How do you feel as you leave and going to your next lesson? (What do they expect from a PE lesson? What preconceptions do they have before arriving? Affect? How do they leave? Journey through PE). What would you change if you had control over PE? (BGI, a way of asking them what they think PE is capable of, what is that they most value in PE, what do they give importance to? 2. Environment and Space Are the environments in which you learn important to you, e.g. gym, sports hall, field, classroom? (PST / BGI / RI (9.10.07) Environment, indoor/outdoor PE. What meaning do they give to their „environment‟?)
276
3. Relationships with others
Does the PE in your school include people that aren‟t so good at sport or don‟t like it as much? (BGI/PST/RD, perception of the subject‟s ethos) How do you think that PE affects your interactions with others? (RD) 4. Choice, curriculum and ability Do you like doing PE with friends who have mixed ability? (Experiences of ability, how do they experience „ability‟ and the importance which they place upon it in PE?) Do you think that PE is both for people who are good and bad at sport? BGI (performance / inclusive debates, departmental performance ethos?) Is there a difference between sport and PE? BGI (Sportification / inclusive debates) Do you think that PE is different to other lessons? (BGI, PST, how do they perceive PE in comparison to rest of NC?) Can you see any difference in what you do in a PE lesson and what you do in your time after school / out of school clubs? (RD/FN (28.9.07) experiences) 5. Pedagogy How do you feel when PE staff chose to take part in lessons? (RD/FN, teaching practice) 6. Behaviour Tell me about your behaviour. What do you think makes you behave how you do? What affects how well you behave? BGI (What are their perceptions of the antecedents to their behaviour, peers, activity, enjoyment). Do you think that your behaviour and what you learn is affected by where you are at the time? PST / BGI (state ref), environment, indoor/outdoor PE, physical environment affecting behaviour and emotional response (Moos cited by Cole et al 1998) Do you think that PE has an affect upon your behaviour? (BGI, (huge question – break down more). Why, how, when?) How do you behave in PE, differently to other lessons? How do your schools behaviour policies and protocols work in PE?
277
Appendix F – Letter to Schools detailing the use of Photographs
278
[Address] [Date] RE: Using photographs during research [Head], During our initial meetings we spoke about the use of photographs during my research project. This stage of my work in your school is soon to commence, and as such I wanted to give you further information on the reasons behind this practice, and what (as a school) you might expect to happen. Why use photos? The use of photographs during research projects such as this serve a dual purpose. First and foremost, they are used to tell a story. They are a method of allowing the participant control over what we talk about during our interview sessions. They will talk me through their photos, and I will ask them to tell me their story of PE, through photos. Secondly, they are used as a mediating artefact; an interview tool used to help discuss the feelings and beliefs of participants through a slightly different medium. The practice can offer the opportunity for a more informed discussion during a prolonged series of interviews. Termed „photo elicitation‟, this practice has been successfully adopted before by other researchers in the field of physical education, and most recently by myself during my time in familiarisation schools for this research project. The work I will do in your school is grounded in the previous findings and recommendations of these pieces of work What will happen? One disposable camera will be given to each of the participating students during their PE lessons. They will be encouraged to use this over a series of lessons to take pictures of things which are important to them when experiencing PE. This might include the facilities, the space they occupy, the groups they are in, the equipment, the teaching, etc. The camera will remain my property. The participants will not be permitted to use the camera out of PE curriculum time (unless discussed with me, i.e. some may feel it important to photograph extra-curricular activities). Implementation policies I feel that it is important for me to recognise and acknowledge that there are a number of potential issues within the implementation of this element of my research. The possible connotations for your school are recognised and addressed through a number of strategies, outlined below. In using cameras in a school based setting, there are obvious restrictions which are important to recognise. These have resonance for the school, the child, and myself through my commitment to my University ethics committee and your own child protection policies. I will as such as you to provide me with lists of students of whom their parents have instructed that photos cannot be taken.
Richard Medcalf [email protected]
Graduate Research School
Direct Line: +44 (0) 1905 855416
279
As a rule, I will instruct the participants not to take photos of their peers close up. Photos of their peers must be taken in large groups from a reasonable distance where no individual is the sole focus. I will also tell them explicitly that camera‟s are not to be taken into changing rooms. If this is something which they want to talk about, through the medium of a photograph, the they will be asked to take a photo of the door to the changing room. I will retain possession of the camera until they have vacated and before they re-enter the changing room area. The times which students will be using the cameras in lessons will be the first and only time during my work that lessons may be disrupted in someway, predominantly through the reactions of their peers to the process. It is this possibility, amongst others, which I will commit to discussing with members of your PE teaching team. The photos will remain securely and confidentially stored by myself, in the same way that the transcripts of my interviews do. I take responsibility for this. They will be stored both digitally and in hard copy. All of the above will be discussed with each participant prior to this phase of research. If you have any questions about this practice, then please do not hesitate to contact me. I‟d be more than happy to continue this discussion as you see fit. Many thanks for your continued support, Richard Medcalf
280
Appendix G – Miscellaneous School Correspondence
281
[Address] [Date] Dear [Headteacher], I am writing to you to express my interest in working with your school during my research into Physical Education. Under the supervision of Dr Joe Marshall (University of Worcester) and Dr John Visser (University of Birmingham), I am researching the experiences of the child with Social Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties in Physical Education. My interest is in the experiences of the child, and I would like to understand their perceptions of PE. As such, the pupils are the focus of the study and your school will not in any way be identified. All information pertaining to this study will remain anonymous and confidential, and I would like to stress that this research is in no way aiming to pass judgements on your department, your school, or the teachers within it. I have already spoken informally with [Head of PE] who has signalled [his/Her] support for my research. If possible, I would like to come to your school and meet with members of your PE department to further discuss my ideas and aims for the project. I have discussed this possibility with [Head of PE], and wanted to now ask for your permission to visit your school in the very near future. I would appreciate confirmation of this permission. If you would also like to meet with me to discuss the research further, then I would be happy to do so. I look forward to hearing from you. Yours Sincerely, Richard Medcalf PhD Research Student
Richard Medcalf [email protected]
Graduate Research School
Direct Line: +44 (0) 1905 855416
282
[Address] [Date] Ref: Agreement in Principle for Research Involvement Dear [Head of PE], Further to our meeting on [Date], I would like to thank you for agreeing to take part in my research. As explained during our meeting, to truly gain a fair representation of the child‟s experiences I envisage that case studies will last between six and ten weeks. To this end, this letter confirms in writing an „agreement in principle‟ for me to spend time in your school during the next academic year. I have planned that your school will be my [stage] case study, and as such I anticipate that I will be joining you sometime in [Date]. I will make contact with you again before this date so as to plan the details of my time with you, and to identify the children with which I could work. No further action is required on your part at this time. However, if you foresee any problems with this initial plan, then please contact me. Best wishes, Richard Medcalf
Richard Medcalf [email protected]
Graduate Research School
Direct Line: +44 (0) 1905 855416
283
[Date] [Address] Dear [Head of PE], Further to our telephone conversation, I am writing to confirm the dates for my visits to [School Name]. These were as follows, [Dates and times – inc first „initial contact‟ meeting]. I look forward to meeting with you on the [date of first visit]. Best wishes, Richard Medcalf PhD Research Student CC: [Head teacher]
Richard Medcalf [email protected]
Graduate Research School
Direct Line: +44 (0) 1905 855416
284
I am writing to you reference some research which is taking place in [school]. One of your tutee‟s, , has been chosen to take part in a project starting next week, exploring the experiences of children in physical education. [Head of PE], and their parent(s), have given consent for this to happen. I have also spoke with [SENCO] about this project. This research will consist of weekly interviews with each participant. It is planned that interviews will take place on *. With effect from the week commencing [date], and ending week commencing [date], these will take place during tutor time, from [time], in the [location]. I would appreciate that, if arrives at your registration on this day, you could send him to meet me. If you have any questions as this process continues, please do not hesitate to contact me, through [Head of PE] if required. My contact details are also given above. Best wishes, Richard Medcalf Cc: [Head Teacher, SENCO, Head of PE] *There are some weeks in which this day will change. I will contact you in advance if this is the case.
Richard Medcalf [email protected]
Graduate Research School
Direct Line: +44 (0) 1905 855416
285
[Address] [Date] [Headteacher], I wanted to write to you to formally thank you and your staff for their support during my research at [school]. I have worked across many departments during the past twelve weeks and have not only had contact with a lot of members of staff from across the school but have also asked a lot of them. Everyone has been very accommodating and supportive and for that I extend my thanks. Special thanks must also go to [Head of PE] and the PE Department for their daily support and interest in my work. I would also like to mention my gratitude to the three participants, [participants], for their involvement and maturity throughout the process. Please pass on my praise and thanks to your chair of governors. As promised, I will share with you a copy of my results. For reasons of anonymity and confidentiality I will only be able to do this once I have worked across two more schools but will honour my commitment to you once this is complete (likely to be 2009). Once again, many thanks for your support. Best wishes, Richard Medcalf cc: [Head of PE]
Richard Medcalf [email protected]
Graduate Research School
Direct Line: +44 (0) 1905 855416
286
Appendix H – Indicative Interview Transcript
287
BCP.T.[ddmmyy] [Time] lasting 16:59 minutes Paul: I was playing football the other day RM: At lunchtime? Paul: This Wednesday yeh, and [name] came towards me so I two footed him in the knees RM: Who‟s [name], do I know him, is he in your class? Paul: The tanned one, no, he‟s in set one RM: He‟s in 9 higher, oh I don‟t go to them because there‟s nothing interesting there, they‟re all boring Paul: Real cocky he is RM: And you what, you two footed him? Paul: Yeh in the knee RM: Is he alright? Paul: Yeh he faked it as well, he was crying, he tried to get me done RM: So why did you do it? Paul: Because he said that he was going to take [name] out, so I was sticking up for [name]. Because [name] [name] and [name] were all going to take out [name], so I was sticking up for [name] RM: And this was Wednesday lunchtime? Paul: Yeh, and he‟d been taking out people so I thought “if you can give it then you can take it”, and he obviously couldn‟t RM: And what‟s happened since? Paul: Nothing, I‟ve just heard that they wrote things on pieces of paper and stuff but, and he said I deliberately did it, but I sort of didn‟t. Because I said that I was going to do it, but then it was accidental when I did RM: That‟s the thing isn‟t it, if they‟ve heard you say that you were going to do it and then you do it Paul: Yeh RM: Did the teachers or something get them to write it down? Paul: Nothing has happened though but I thought it would have by now, so RM: It‟s Friday now too. Are you worried about it? Paul: I don‟t give a shit to be honest, I want to go to [name] school RM: You want to change school?
288
Paul: Yeh, that priory thing, because some of my mates go there. Because if you get kicked out of school you go there RM: Yeh but you don‟t want to try to get kicked out of school do you? Paul: I dunno really, I just hate everyone in my year to be honest. I get along with the girls and that, but not the boys, so I hang around with the year tens and stuff RM: Why do you think that is, is that because you‟re like naturally bigger than them, or do you think you‟re like, are you more mature or something? Paul: Well they all love [name], and um, he used to be the best at football in year 7, and then everyone thought that I was in year 8, and then he‟s like trying to turn everyone against me, but I don‟t care to be honest RM: Does this kind of thing like, obviously you say that it doesn‟t bother you, and you‟re not bothered about the school and things, but like does it actually get to you, does it like, you know, after Wednesday does it like affect you in lessons or anything? Paul: I don‟t care RM: It doesn‟t like affect your behaviour or anything? Paul: Mr [name] was cheating in our PE lesson RM: What, football? What did you think to that, were you quite happy because I know that we‟ve spoke a lot about you wanting to do football haven‟t we? Paul: Yeh, but he kept pulling me back, every time RM: Well at the start we both said that we knew that you were the best one there, and you were going to try and megg us and all this lot, so we thought that “well if their team beat us then so what, but we won‟t let Paul get the best of us” sort of thing Paul: I‟d still got the best of Mr [name] RM: Because you can play against people our age cant you, that‟s the thing, that‟s why its different to most of them in your year Paul: [name] is alright RM: [Name] works very hard, he runs around like an idiot Paul: [name] is shocking, he missed about three sitter‟s against you. But the goals are too small though RM: I did find that quite funny Paul: The goals are too small though RM: Well they need posts as well, because for his like, for his, he apparently scored the second goal didn‟t he but you couldn‟t tell whether it was in or not Paul: Yeh, I thought mine was in, because if there was a post it would have hit the post and gone in
289
RM: Hit then post and gone in yeh, but it‟s difficult to call isn‟t it? How important is like, not just your ability but other people‟s ability as well. Does it like get to you when people are crap at something that you‟re good at sort of thing? Paul: Yeh it‟s annoying, because you haven‟t got no competition RM: And is it really important to you that you‟re the best of something then? Paul: Yeh, because I‟m like really competitive RM: So like playing against people like me and Mr [name], is that something that you kind of, how did you, what did you think to that? Paul: I just thought that I had to try and skin both of you RM: [laughter] Paul: I skinned Mr [name] a few times, got him with the back heel as well and then he pulled me back RM: Thing is, Mr [name] is good going forward isn‟t he, he‟s got a lot of pace Paul: Yeh RM: But I always play at the back when I play, that‟s why I‟ll happily just sit on your shoulder and not let you turn me sort of thing, and then when I do start venturing a bit too far forward the ball just gets kicked out of the court! But like, there were some times when, like, the whole, the idea of ability to me is quite like interesting, because obviously you‟re good at football and there are some other sports that you‟re not so good at, like cricket, and I know you‟ve said that you don‟t enjoy cricket as much mainly because you‟re not good at it. Is like, I know you‟ve said that you‟re competitive, is like, do you like to play people who are as good as you, or do you like to play people who are like worse than you so that you can beat them? Paul: The same really. I wouldn‟t mind if they were a bit better, but like if there were the best, amazing, then I wouldn‟t bother RM: Because like, I remember a while ago now, and it was a different sport it was a tennis lesson, and I don‟t know if you‟ll remember it but we were on the tennis courts and it was those at the end, you know where you play as a pair and if you win you move up, and if you lose you move down kind of thing Paul: Yeh RM: And I remember, didn‟t you like move, you started off at the bottom so that you could play, well, did you do it so that you could play the people who Paul: No I wanted to work all the way up RM: Yeh Paul: But then we didn‟t have enough time RM: So you did choose to start at the bottom and play the people who are crap Paul: No because I played [name], he‟s pretty good RM: But was it so that you could, you say that it‟s so that you could move up, you‟d prefer to do that rather than stay at the top all of the time?
290
Paul: Yeh because there‟s no competition at the top, because you‟re like already winning, if you win one game, so RM: But then the guys down the bottom won‟t give you much competition will they? Paul: I dunno, maybe, like I‟m not very good at tennis, I used to be pretty good RM: How was um, how was tennis the other day, because I wasn‟t here on Tuesday, it‟s the first lesson I‟ve missed Paul: Yeh it was pretty good yeh, we played little match things, like volleying RM: Did you? Were you using the bigger courts, or was it just the same Paul: The bigger courts yeh, but like half of them, so the big tennis court we used as two RM: Oh ok yeh, so you‟ve got like long ways halves sort of thing. Were you actually using the net were you? Paul: Well good RM: What made it better than some of the other tennis lessons? Paul: We got to hit it over the net RM: Yeh? Paul: I just want to play proper competitive tennis, because I used to be good at that, playing against my mates and stuff RM: Like on the full courts sort of thing? Paul: [nods] RM: Did he have you all in the one tennis thing, or did he let you go up to the top? Paul: All in the one, because we had, you know those things that you jump over, that are like that high RM: That you use for the long jump? Paul: Yeh, he put them across in the middle of the tennis courts and one at the side. I can‟t wait to do Rounder‟s. RM: That will be next year wont it? Because I thought that Mr [name] was going to let you do it in his last lesson Paul: Rounder‟s is absolutely amazing, I‟m good at Rounder‟s RM: Who taught you for tennis? Paul: Who taught me? RM: Yeh, was it Mr [name] or Mr [name]? Paul: [Name] on Tuesday
291
RM: Yeh? Paul: Yeh RM: And then he took the football really didn‟t he, as well. Paul: Mr [name] is pretty good at football, on tackling. We stuffed their team. RM: Does he ever get in there? Does he ever play against Paul: Yeh he always goes on the opposite team to me RM: What and tries to stop you? Paul: Yeh, because he‟s good at defending. We stuffed their team we beat them 5-0 RM: And then they came and beat us Paul: Yeh I know, you had the best team. I just said to [name], get the biggest person in the year apart from me, so [name] at the back, and get [name], he‟s pretty good RM: Yeh but you had [name] as well didn‟t you? Paul: Yeh but [name] isn‟t usually nothing, but it‟s an extra player RM: So like with that then, were you telling, because [name] was captain, were you telling him who to pick? Paul: Yeh RM: So you weren‟t necessarily picking, because there were better players that you could have picked weren‟t there? Paul: Yeh RM: Again, was that like, were you picking it so you were like the best player on the team? Paul: No I was just being tactical because I knew that I was going to be in the middle, and [name] was going to be up front so we needed two defenders otherwise we were going to lose, because [name] never comes back so I know that we needed two people at the back RM: Right, so you were thinking about it? Paul: Yeh RM: It makes sense Paul: Because I play all those football managers, they‟re well good they are RM: Which one do you play? Paul: I play the new one at the moment RM: On which, Xbox? Paul: Computer, football manager 08, I won the league with Barcelona RM: You don‟t pick the rubbish teams on that then!
292
Paul: No RM: I always used to play that, Sunday night every week Paul: It‟s awesome RM: It used to be championship manager didn‟t it? Paul: Yeh and then they split up RM: Yeh Paul: But now championship manager isn‟t as good, because there were two people in it and the person who was better made football manager RM: What are you thinking for next lesson, athletics then, well period two isn‟t it? Paul: Hopefully we‟ll get to do Rounder‟s or something. Are you in period 1? RM: No because period one is 8 higher‟s isn‟t it, and I don‟t go in there, and then you‟ve got period two haven‟t you? Paul: Yeh, hopefully we‟ll do Rounders RM: Have you got your kit? Paul: I think so RM: Have you started to like bring it a bit more? Paul: Yeh because I kept, I just lost my timetable and then, yeh I have RM: So what if, if he tells you like that its athletics and you‟re doing long distance running Paul: I won‟t be able to do that RM: No? Are you going to have an injury or something? Paul: I dunno, I might have, I might pick one up in RE RM: On the way? Pick one up down the corridor? Paul: Yep RM: Well it‟s going to be athletics. Well I suppose it might not be, because you didn‟t get to do your tennis on Wednesday because of your football lesson, so he might get you to do tennis again Paul: Yeh RM: Does it like really affect you, because like with the football lesson it was something that you obviously wanted to do Paul: Yeh, no one likes athletics though. Well I don‟t think anyone likes it in our thing?
293
RM: So like, the content of a lesson, whether its tennis or athletics or cricket or football or anything, does it make any difference to you whether you then behave better in other lessons after PE, or whatever? Paul: No not really RM: Like after football, because it was a thing that you wanted to do, were you in a, you know, better mood for the rest of the day? Paul: Yeh, I don‟t know what lesson I had after, I think it was music or something RM: So does it also depend on other things like that, like whether you were going to maths or something? Paul: Yeh because athletics, I hate it, I don‟t see the point in athletics to be honest if no one likes it. It‟s fair enough if like five people like it, but no one likes it RM: So is this going to like really piss you off now? Paul: Yeh RM: What‟s in like in the winter when you‟ve got PE, and it‟s wet and cold and stuff like that? Paul: Rugby and that is absolutely amazing, because we go on the bottom pitch and its well slippery and everything RM: Yeh, and you just get to get stuck in? So do you have to have a shower and stuff? Paul: Yeh, but if you have it last lesson then I just walk home in my kit, because we had it last lesson last year RM: So the cold and that lot doesn‟t bother you? Paul: Not if I‟m playing a sport that I like, but if it was something like running, then it‟s shocking RM: Because you‟ve, with athletics you‟ve done sprinting haven‟t you, and you‟ve done long jump and triple jump Paul: What will it be now, like high jump? RM: Yeh or you might do throwing, you haven‟t done shot putt have you? Paul: No, that‟s good RM: Shot putt or javelin or something Paul: Oh I‟m crap at javelin RM: Because like, does that affect, you know we said, a couple of weeks ago now you said that PE normally relaxes you because you get to do something that you like, and then last week you said that it can relax you, but sometimes it kind of, how did you put it, makes you lively again? Paul: Yeh RM: You know, excites you a bit, winds you up a bit. Does like the lesson that you‟ve got, does that affect whether you leave it like relaxed or wound up? Paul: Yeh probably because if there is a teacher that I don‟t like then I would just be naughty
294
RM: Even in PE, with like Mr [name] compared to Mr [name] or something? Paul: Yeh I like Mr [name], I don‟t really like Mr [name] to be honest RM: Didn‟t like him or didn‟t like his teacher? Paul: Well he was like alright, but his teaching was crap. He took too long to get into everything? RM: All of the stuff at the start do you mean? Paul: Yeh, what‟s the point in all of that? Because if we did it the lesson before, then there is no point in going over it again RM: Yeh? Paul: Because in sports you always remember something. It‟s not like science or something RM: Like you‟ve said, you‟ve said before haven‟t you, that you want to play games because you think that you learn by playing the games and making mistakes sort of thing Paul: Yeh, I‟ll ask Sir if we can play Rounders today RM: You might have to ask him nicely Paul: I‟ll try to get loads of us to ask him RM: What, go down the line and say “everyone make a big deal out of it” Paul: Yeh RM: I don‟t think you‟ll get to do tennis, because the girls will be doing tennis because they missed theirs the other day Paul: I Love Rounder‟s RM: Are you looking forward to next year then? Paul: Yeh RM: Are you getting to drop some subject‟s that you don‟t like as well? Paul: Yeh, [subject]. I was hoping to drop [subject] but you have to do it don‟t you? RM: Can you not like, are you dropping [subject] as well? Paul: Yeh but I like annoying Miss [name] in that lesson, that‟s pretty good RM: What the whole purpose of a lesson is to piss a teacher off? Paul: Yeh, oh I‟ve got a detention this lunchtime because of that RM: Was this one of those ones, because last week you were telling me how you like trying to get sent out, because it‟s good fun going to sit in the corridor and stuff Paul: Yeh it‟s well good
295
RM: Is this one of them, where you‟ve been sent out and now you‟ve got to come back Paul: Yeh I have to sit in the corner on a little chair, it‟s well good RM: But you‟ve still not had an after school? Paul: I get out of them RM: Somehow Paul: Yeh I just say “can I have a lunchtime detention” and then she only keeps me in for like 5 minutes RM: It‟s because she doesn‟t want to sit with you, that‟s the thing Paul: Yeh probably RM: She‟ll be sick of the sight of you if you‟re doing that all the time. Alright, cool. ENDS